OldTimer1960

There is no conceivable scenario (at least to me) that would justify the Bills giving up at least their 2nd and probably 3rd picks this year to move up and take ANY player in this draft. Go back a couple of years and change Suh's name for Glenn Dorsey and you'll get an idea. Dorsey was touted as a dominant DT and he has done nothing for a bad KC team in 2 years. None of these guys are sure things and the Bills have so many holes that they can't afford to give up picks.

Motivation most often must come from inside a person. External motivation won't help much if the kid is lazy and is handed millions (or even hundreds of thousands) of dollars. I say STAY away from fat, unmotivated underachievers with high picks. Now, if he were around in, say, the 4th, then the risk/reward ratio might be about right. I have seen at least some places who project Cody as a late pick due to the weight issue.

The answer to this question is never black & white. There are always gray areas. Of course, you never want to take a player just because he plays a position of need unless he is truly better than what you already have. No team, especially the Bills, has only 1 glaring need, so this is a matter of gradations. Perhaps it is the best player at one of your positions of need. For example, the Bills need OTs, NT, LBs, WRs, QB and some other lesser needs. You can prioritize those needs based on how important the position is and how bad your current players are at each position. However, let's say the Bills think that NT is the #1 need given their move to 3-4. That wouldn't justify passing over a higher rated OT, LB or QB to fill a need with a questionable prospect. Overall, I favor best player available, but it is with caveats. All needs being equal, I'd say an equivalent player at QB, LT, NT, or LB would be more important than one at S, RB, WR, TE or C/G. However, if the player at the "less important or less needed" position is clearly superior to any QB, LT, NT or LB, then I think that there is an argument to be made for the lesser position - to a point. I guess I didn't answer definitively, but I think that is because there is no real definitive answer.

The Bills will never get enough value for Evans to offset his loss (ie, the trade would be lopsided against the Bills). I say this assuming that Evans might get the Bills a 2nd round pick in return. I don't think any team would pony up a #1 pick for him. If someone does, then *maybe* consider it, but remember a #1 pick is not a sure-thing. In this case a bird (Evans) in the hand is worth more than the 2 in the bush.

I am with you on not addressing QB in the draft this year. I wouldn't spend a 3rd on one of the weak left-overs at QB. What's the point in that? They don't need another guy that can hopefully develop into a long-term backup. They have a stable of those guys already in Fitz, Edwards and probably Brohm. A 3rd in this year's draft should net you a pretty good player that has the potential to be a long-term starter at some position, provided that you don't reach for a weak prospect to fill a need. I'd anticipate that there will be much better LB, WR, RB and maybe DL prospects available at that point than any of the QBs will be. My only nit with your post is that you included Derek Anderson in the list of potential veteran stop-gaps. Man, he might be worse than Edwards and Fitzpatrick. Do you remember the Browns-Bills game? Anderson was AWFUL in that game.

I like Levitre at G. I would not like to see them move him to LT as he is, at best, a compromise at that spot. Putting Levitre at LT would take Levitre out of his best position and put him where he will be a marginal player due to lack of height and elite athleticism.

I disagree, I think that him not even making the active roster in GB one year after being a 2nd round pick speaks volumes about him. Now, I am not saying that he might not become a good QB, just that it certainly doesn't seem likely given his NFL career to date.

I don't understand all the excitement over Lefevour. I haven't read much that says anything other than his arm is marginal, he played at a slightly lower level of competition and he's pegged as a mid-round pick. I might be missing where folks scouts are that high on him.

I would be reluctant to spend a 2nd round pick, let alone another pick (for the trade up) and a 2nd for a big fat out of shape underachiever. If the guy couldn't be bothered to get in at least half decent shape for a job audition (Senior Bowl) that could mean $Millions to him, then what will he be like once he actually gets paid?

While I am concerned that he did SO little as a rookie, I am in general agreement with the last poster. Maybin should be given at least another season, maybe 2 before calling him a bust. EVERYONE knew that he was a project when he was drafted as a 20 y.o. sophomore. He needs time to fill out physicaly and also gain experience - remember, he only played 2 years of college football. It is fair to take issue with the Bills for drafting a project when it might have been preferrable to pick someone who may have been able to contribute more readily. However, that issue must be pointed at the Bills, not Maybin. I haven't heard anything from Maybin to suggest that he isn't a worker (maybe others have). Others here are right, his build isn't likely to change that much, though he can get stronger. There isn't just one set build to succeed in the NFL at any specific position. Aaron Schobel is built about the same as Maybin. Now with the switch to a 3-4 defense, neither fits as a DE, but Maybin might be a pretty good rush LB. I am not saying that he will or won't succeed, nor am I saying that we all have to like that the Bills spent a #1 pick on him, but this is a sunk investment - they might as well wait it out and see if he develops.

If there were any really good QB prospects in this draft, then I *might* consider taking a QB in round 1 in spite of the obvious problems on the OL and D. BUT, there ISN'T a top QB prospect in this entire draft. I don't want Clausen or Bradford and Pike, LeFeavre, etc aren't any better than Edwards or Fitz (IMHO). Just fix the OL and D and worry about QB next year (or after the lockout).

Suh would be great, but won't be available. I love all that I've read about Iupati, but I don't think a Guard would be much help with Levitre and Wood already here and I don't think he can really play T. Not much of a fan of either QB. I'd have to include some other LBs in the discussion such as Kindle from Texas.

I think that NT has moved to one of the top 3 needs. I think you have to see how the picks fall as the Bills definitely need LT, NT, QB, LB and WR help (assuming Owens and Reed are gone) . I am in the camp that thinks that they should build the lines (including LB) before spending high picks on a QB. This team is not ready to compete for the playoffs next year and I think they should build the rest of the team and aim for a QB next year.

I think (HOPE?) that Schobel would still fetch more than a 6th round draft pick. He is still a productive pass rusher. I'd hope that they could get a 3rd rounder for him, but hey, what do I know?

Thank you! From what I've read, Davis is all potential and not so much production. He was benched this season for being over-weight. I don't know how a team could really spend a high pick and hand $MILLIONS to someone who is that unmotivated - even if they are supremely talented.

Excellent, thank you. We could have played that game all day. Fact of the matter is that there are examples of good players drafted in every round and any team could be accused of passing over them. Just to add a few to your list, every team passed on Brett Farve and Drew Breese at least once. There are many many more...

based only on what I've read so far, Charles Brown isn't good enough to play LT in the NFL and showed in the all star games that he isn't a guard, either. I wouldn't touch him until the 4th round based on what I've read.

Not exactly an already-accomplished staff. However, being realistic, the coaching staff matters a smidge, the players matter A LOT. The Bills currently don't have the players to win with if Vince Lombardi were reincarnated as their coach. So, let's get the players to win with and see how this coaching staff can handle that.

Why would we want to sign an over-priced over-the-hill bum like Porter?

While I agree that Iupati (the guard you are talking about) is an outstanding prospect, I wonder how much he'd really help the Bills. I think the Bills are all set with the interior of their OL with Levitre, Wood, Hangartner (and I hope Incognito back). None of those players, inlcuding Iupati (based on what I've read) really would be able to play LT and maybe not even RT. So, Iupati at 9 would seem to bump Wood, Levitre or Hangartner to the bench. Not sure that is a huge upgrade. Don't get me wrong, I couldn't get too upset at drafting Iupati based on the glowing things I've read about him, but I don't think he'd solve the real glaring problem at LT.

One justification is that Anthony Davis is an overweight underachiever (yes, very talented). I can't see the Bills having the luxury of gambling on him. Bulaga is a different story, but there may be significantly better players available at other positions (like DE, LB). Based on what I've read about Bulaga so far, I wouldn't be upset with them taking him at #9, but he may be a bit of a reach at that spot. It is always a balance, best player regardless of need vs. filling needs.

That GB, who drafted Brohm in the 2nd round a couple years ago, had him on their practice squad is a giant clue that the Packers didn't think that Brohm had a future in the NFL. Now, teams do make mistakes in evaluating young players, but think how little they must have thought of him to put a recent 2nd round pick on the practice squad. Teams don't like to admit mistakes with high round picks, especially so soon after drafting him. Maybe Brohm got a raw deal in GB, I don't know, but I wouldn't pin my hopes on him. Sure, let him compete for the job, but he can't be Plan A.

I agree, but to underscore your point that every pick has some risk, take the Raider's selection of OL Robert Gallery a few years ago. He would have been considered a very low risk pick at the time, yet he bombed as an OT in the NFL and hasn't exactly been great even inside at OG. There are many others, but another that comes to mind is KC's selection of Glen Dorsey. He has not played anywhere near the level that most thought he would and there were no particular red-flags on him (at least that I knew about). Still, I think we are both saying the same thing: spend picks (at least the early ones) on as close to sure-thing good starters as you can. While completely ignoring positions of need would be foolish, too, it is more important to get good long-term starters out of this draft. As you said (and everyone here knows), the Bills are not going to be a playoff team next year. Build a sound defense and try to fix the OL further and the Bills could be reasonably competitive next year. Good defense and a good running game may be boring, but if they can accomplish that, they'll be in most every game even without a top QB.

Not everyone thinks McClain is so good. It isn't just Nawrocki (and he still had him in the top 15). Sporting News, which is run by a former NFL scout, isn't sold on McClain anywhere in round 1. Now, I am not sure who I agree with on McClain, but I don't think McClain is this year's version of Patrick Willis who is a true killing machine.

Several of the playoff teams don't have 1st round QBs, either including: Arizona (Warner - undrafted) Minn (Favre - 2nd rnd) Pats (Brady 6th) Saints (Brees 2nd - I think this is right). The same could be said for ANY position. Logically, since teams really only get 1 1st round pick/year (unless there is a trade involved) and there are 22 starting positions, it would take 22 years of #1 picks to fill every starting position. Most players don't even play 10 years, so it is clear that teams must get significant contributions from players other than #1 picks. I agree that some positions are more important than others (QB. LT, DE are probably the most important - but that is debatable and dependent on a team's scheme and other strengths/weaknesses). But, there are a multitude of ways to build a successful team and there will always be tradeoffs to consider. I think that the most important thing for the Bills in rounds 1-3 this year is to get players that will make significant contributions for several years. That does not mean that they MUST start from day 1, but that would help. They need to get 3 good long-term starters out of rounds 1-3. I think reaching for a position of need is a disaster and a way to ensure that they won't get those 3 good starters. So, if they think there is a legitimate good/very good LT or QB at 9 this year, then by all means take him. But, don't reach for a LT or QB and hope that they'll be the answer. We've been there before. Misses happen in the draft all the time to every team. But there are approaches to minimize the risk of this. I think picking players like the Bills did in Wood and Levitre works along those lines. Those guys were low-risk solid selections. Maybe they didn't have quite as high a ceiling as some other players (like Maybin), but their floor was also much higher than Maybin's. You knew much more of what you were getting with Wood and Levitre.