uncle flap

DION JORDAN http://youtu.be/BK63egsPvu4

*obvious-yet-poorly-delivered-joke alert* That's a weak strong side. The weak side looks strong, though.

I checked those out and they are certainly interesting and well-researched. I agree with your premise but disagree with your conclusion. The stats you're talking about are descriptive and speak to a particular pick's value - "pick" as in draft slot, not "pick" as in player. I don't think they can be applied position-wise because there are too many other variables in play. For example (and correct me if I'm wrong), by your logic, any of the QBs the Bills could hypothetically draft at #8 (or #22 or #36, etc.) have the same chance at success/stardom. Well, that's obviously inherently flawed. While we can all disagree on who has the best shot, nobody would claim that each of the QBs chances are equal. Or to put it another way, does Geno Smith have a better chance at success with the Eagles at #4, the Bills at #8, or the Vikings at #23? There's an argument for all sides, but now flip the teams. Does the draft position matter? Or is it more Geno's talent, his coaching staff, his surrounding cast, etc? While draft position will impact the amount and types of opportunity a player receives (among many other factors), ultimately their individual ability is the key variable in their success. The question is, "Is there a statistical way to predict player X's success?" The Holy Grail in NFL/NCAA statistics would be an analytical model to predict a player's success/stardom. Many have tried and seemingly all have failed. From one of the links I posted upthread:

Dibs nailed it. Probability-wise, the more players they draft, the more chances they get at having a player that pans out. However, in general, the lower the pick, the lower the odds of that particular pick panning out. So in a vacuum, it's basically wash. The question is: Would you prefer quality over quantity? Not to bash the OP at all because it's an interesting idea (though a little convoluted the way it was presented), but it would be interesting to see a statistical analysis of draft position vs performance. Here's some food for thought: http://www.sph.umn.edu/faculty1/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/rr2010-022.pdf http://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/how-to-value-nfl-draft-picks/

Sounds perfect for the Bills... and Buffalo... and New York State.

Good thing there's 5 months before the season starts. And eleventy zillion threads already discussing it.

True, but then they did this: http://www.buffalonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20130315/SPORTS/130319491/1004 Only reason the Bills haven't done this is bc Buddy can't figure out how to call himself back.

Nope. Last week their coach tried to fight the opposing coach after an end-of-the-game brawl. http://queencitysports.net/bandits/brawl-overshadows-the-end-of-banditsmammoth-game/

Did you guys hear that they called Lawson at 12:01 on Saturday? That tells me that they are trying. I aslo can't imagine that he was the only guy that they called early on. Nearly every FA that has signed has either gone to a contender or has been extremely overpaid for. There are plenty of good, solid guys out there can help the Bills. It takes some time to hammer out these signings when you aren't willing to overpay. Be patient. There's no way that they go into the draft without signing a few more players; Most likely another LB, a WR, a Safety, and an O lineman. Probably a TE too. With the Bills' cap situation, they cant fill all those holes by over paying on top flight guys. Oh, and "A's" is short for "Athletics." An apostrophe is used to mark omissions. As in "you're" and "can't" for example.

We don't know that some of the younger guys aren't capable of being leaders. For example, say what you want about Sheppard's on field play thus far, but he was the undisputed team leader at LSU. He was known for his passionate pre game speeches and firing up his squad. We've also seen Dareus be pretty damn vocal already in his short time here. Wood has too. Basically, what I'm getting at is that the younger guys are expected to defer to the veterans. Let's wait and see who emerges before we say there aren't any leaders to fill the void. There could be plenty of great leaders who just haven't had the opportunity. Also, the fact that we will likely be seeing younger guys stepping into those roles is encouraging because we have a new staff. These younger guys won't be as set in their ways as some of those cagey vets. If Marrone and Pettine know what they're doing, some of that leadership and perspective will rub off on the new breed of leaders.

BRILLIANT! Git 'er done, Buddy!

Me too til I realized "Deers" would've been even funnier

I hope so and he stands a much better chance in an attacking D like Pettine's. I also don't really think he's going to be cut, but was just guessing at a surprise move.

According to this: http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2013/2/16/3991868/mark-anderson-contract-prevents-release-in-2013 "The Bills have the same cap hit for Anderson whether he's on the roster or not." So it really boils down to whether or not they think he's worth a roster spot. Even though the author of this article disagrees.

Surprise move? Mark Anderson gets cut. Not a three down player, and he's coming off two knee surgeries and was extremely disappointing in his limited time. Could've been the coaching or it could be that he's just not that good. Plus he makes a decent chunk of change, and perhaps the new analytics dept figures they can replace a one trick pony with a more versatile player.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oShTJ90fC34

So, to summarize: Draft Barkley and a WR and we are pretty much set on Offense? Fair enough. I'd rather get an impact player on Defense in the 1st and hope for the best with a 2nd rd QB. Receivers can be had in the third. IMO, this class seems especially deep with WRs. If the staff sees Barkley as a franchise QB, then I'm ok with the pick, but right now the Defense needs a heckuva lot more help. Maybe free agency changes that. I just don't see how Barkley is that much better than a QB that could be picked in the second or third, while there are prospects at other positions with a much steeper drop off as the rounds progress.

I think the Browns are gonna get a couple marquee guys- they are almost $50 mil under the cap.

For those of you wondering what the D will look like schematically, here's a great article breaking down what Pettine likes to run: http://www.buffalobillsdraft.com/2013/02/breaking-down-mike-pettine-part-2/ Obviously, there's no way to know how much will be carried over to the Bills, but at least we get a glimpse into his tendencies. I agree that DT isn't a big need. Just bc they seemingly will be lining up w 2 and 3 DL most of the doesn't mean they have to be space eaters. Pettine runs agressive, attacking formations. I think getting penetration would be a higher priority than simply tying up the OL.

That's also true, but as far as I can tell they would almost certainly bring in an arbitrator and the holdout would eventually result in a new contract. And even before that would happen, it's more likely they'd trade him like I said and make it some other team's problem. Not that we should be worrying about it or speculating. It was a dumb post by me in a dumb thread. Byrd has until July to sign the tender. However, it seems like it is in his best interest to get it done soon: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/08/melton-spencer-were-wise-to-sign-franchise-tenders/

I just checked on that- he would stand to lose a year of accrued service. He's already had four years, and as far as I can tell I don't think losing a year changes his status at this point in his career, although I'm hardly an expert. But you're right, the new rules are more prohibitive and are designed to put the pressure on the player/agent and get a quick resolution.

Keep in mind that Byrd's agent is Eugene Parker who doesn't play nice with Brandon and Overdorf. Remember the Jason Peters fiasco? It's certainly within the realm of possibility that Parker advises Byrd to hold out if they can't reach a long term deal. If the situation gets messy, the Bills may decide to swing a trade to make it some other team's problem. I'm not saying that's likely to happen but it wouldn't be the first time something like that has gone down.

FWIW, he said "Bills news will be up after 10:30PM waiting on some more stuff"

Maybe Fitz will retire too