Brandon

Chris Long and Vernon Gholston are the only 'impact' pass rushers in this draft, IMO and its highly unlikely either will be available at 11. I'd draft a DE in R2-4 with the hope that he'll overachieve and that your scouting department can find a sleeper. I have no problems with taking a DE there, but the thing I wouldn't do is draft a DE at 11 just to make myself feel better. While I believe Harvey will probably go in the top 10, I'm not at all sure that he should.

Bills receive picks 17, 73 and 82 Chiefs receive picks 11 and 114 17) WR Devin Thomas, Michigan State 41) CB Antoine Cason, Arizona 72) DE Jason Jones, Eastern Michigan 73) FS Tyvon Branch, Connecticut 82) TE Jermichael Finley, Texas 132) OG Mike McGlynn, Pittsburgh 147) OC John Sullivan, Notre Dame 179) WR Pierre Garcon, Mount Union 219) WR Todd Blythe, Iowa State 224) CB Jonathan Zenon, LSU 251) OLB Steve Octavien, Nebraska Obviously, I think that the rumored trade with KC will happen, it makes too much sense for both teams. Devin Thomas is probably their guy at 17, but I wouldn't be surprised if they pick Hardy or Sweed there, either. 41 is probably a little low for Cason, but they'll probably still get a solid CB prospect this deep in the draft, making a move up less likely. The rest all fill various needs for competition and depth, but two clarifications are probably in order. One is the FS. The Bills always throw a curveball, usually in R3, and I feel that FS will probably be that pick this year. I wouldn't be shocked if they pick Tyrell Johnson at 41 over a CB, either. The other interesting thing will be to see whether they pick two WRs or three. I have them picking three, one in the first, two more late. If they go with two, I think they'll still pick a WR in the 1st, but the 2nd one will probably be in R4 or perhaps 5.

If you take a close look at what this staff has done in the last two years, they've addressed every unit on the team except the receiving corps. Given that fact (as well as how putrid their passing attack is), it seems logical to assume that the WRs and TEs will be next on the laundry list of things to upgrade. I also think that the impact of Lee Evans' impending FA next year is being vastly underrated in all of this and will have a major influence in how they approach this draft.

That's what concerns me about Harvey. Generally speaking, DEs have a very rough transition into the NFL. Opposing OTs are too good anymore. These days, unless a DE is truly a playmaker, he's probably going to be very ordinary. There's no middle ground and again, its because the OTs around the league are so athletic and talented these days that unless that DE has some outstanding quality (and usually, its speed), he'll be shut down. To me, Harvey doesn't appear to have any standout qualities. He'd probably be an excellent pass-rushing OLB, but as a DE, I think there's a very real chance that he's a deluxe version of Chris Kelsay.

Phillip Merling. Don't like him at all. Brandon Flowers. He's a 2nd round type, IMO. Honestly, I can't think of any other picks that I'd be too upset with, as I don't see them making a major reach. Perhaps Antoine Cason, as I expect him to go about 20 picks later, but I think he'll be a solid starting CB in the NFL and I wouldn't complain too much.

I don't think Derrick Harvey will be available, either. Its much the same as with McKelvin. The Pats, Ravens, and Bengals could all end up taking him, assuming he's as good as the hype around here. The Pats have an obvious need at OLB and Harvey would probably fit there as a pass rusher. The Ravens? How many DEs are listed on their roster? 1...Jarrett Johnson. Cincinnatti had only 20 sacks as a team last year. They have a couple of guys who played well in situational roles last year, but may be looking for a true starter.

I don't think its a bad move. Its probably not what I'd do, but McKelvin would be a very solid pick.

Its hard to argue that the Bills will be anything but a defensive team. Their offense is miserable and they've made no upgrades to this point. They haven't finished better than 25th in total yardage in the last five years and have been in the bottom 23 teams in scoring four of the last five years. The best showing for the Bills passing game in that time has been 27th, a time during which they haven't broken 3,000 team passing yards once. This first pick may be a defensive player, but on the balance, I fully expect this draft to lean toward offense. They can't win with the level of ineptitude we've seen on that side of the ball the last several years, no matter how well the defense plays.

I think its certainly possible that McKelvin is the guy they want, but at the same time, I don't believe he'll be available. All four teams immediately ahead of the Bills could potentially take him, but especially New England at 7 and Baltimore at 8. Additionally, considering that McKelvin is a bit of a longshot to even reach the 11th overall pick, I'm not so sure I believe that the Bills would be leaking their interest to the media. It may either be total speculation by Clayton or a bit of posturing by the Bills with these trade talks ongoing.

I'd guess that their interest is legitimate. Look at their WR corps. Its horrible.

I agree, the Bills do need playmakers, but they're needed on both sides of the ball. I have no problems with drafting a DE at 11, but I also hold no illusions that it'll turn this team into a winner alone. It won't. I also remain unconvinced that Harvey is a game-changing DE that will provide a serious upgrade, especially in the immediate term. I do not classify the #2 WR as subordinate in some way to the #1. Both are starters, both will play 90%+ of the snaps. Both need to be able to play. Its just like the supposed #2 CB. If that guy can't play or is limited in some way, the opposing team will game plan around that weakness and use it to cripple your offense/defense as a whole.

I'm not really that concerned about the Patriots or how the Giants beat them. I'm really not. The Bills simply are not competitive with them at this time and realistically will not be for at least another year or two. Its funny that everyone has jumped on the Giants bandwagon as the blueprint to beat the Patriots. And it probably is. The problem? The Giants, for all their goodness, allowed 36 TDs defensively last year (more than the Bills D, I might add). Yes, folks...they allowed 16 more TDs than the Bills offense scored last year. In other words, put all of the Giants defensive players on this team, and this team STILL loses 9-10 games next year. The difference? The Giants actually have an offense, too. This team will not win consistently until it can score at least 20 points per game. It doesn't mean we should definitely take a WR at 11. But the point I'm illustrating is simply this: for all those that are on the defensive end bandwagon, realize that the Giants defense, as good as their pass rush is, still gave up yards and still gave up points. A WR may not turn this team into an instant winner, either, but this team's offense could be stymied by fighting through a wet paper bag. Until that changes, they're not going to win, no matter how many defensive ends you draft.

Its definitely not as bad as the 2000 draft. We all remember it as being terrible for the Bills, but it was a miserable draft for most other teams as well.

Coulda, woulda, shoulda...the reality is that we didn't. Of course, as Lurker said, teams weren't exactly beating his door down to sign him, either. Overrated? Looks that way.

If I thought there was a Bruce Smith on the board at 11, I'd say go for it. I don't think Harvey is that type of player, though. As for the WRs, the difference is that I don't classify the second WR as any less important than the #1. It may not be necessary to pick that position in R1, but I don't view it any differently as any other starting position.

You can potentially get a great DE for a fraction of the money, but you can say that of any position selected in R1. If they take Devin Thomas, as I believe they will, they'll be paying the contract you describe. On the other hand, look at how much a decent veteran WR like Jerry Porter cost this offseason. 6 years, $30M with $10M guaranteed. Bernard Berrian? 6 years, $42 million, $16 million guaranteed. There's no telling what Lee Evans will sign for. Its a nice way to get a 'bargain' at DE, but its a nice way to get a bargain at any position.

No offense, but that's not a very compelling argument. Any 'star' player is going to cost a fortune when the Bills re-sign him. Just wait until the Bills re-sign Lee Evans, assuming they do.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Bills take as many as three WRs in this draft, though obviously two probably wouldn't be high picks. They have only three quality WRs on the roster. They need at least five, if not six. I think they'll probably draft Devin Thomas at 11, followed by another in R4-6, and one more in the 7th. That 4th-6th will probably be a slot guy to compete with Reed and Parrish, while the R7 guy a backup redzone target. I'm not as sure about a R2 TE, though. I believe they will select a CB in R2, while the quality is still there. They should still get a solid TE prospect in R3 or could even consider trading back up late into R2 if necessary.

I'm not sure that its a fact or not. Defensive linemen, in particular, often take a couple of years to adjust to the strength of the OL they face in the NFL. The one area where I think a rookie WR can certainly have a big impact on this team is in the redzone. Even in the worst case scenario, if you bring in a 6'4" WR against the 5'10" CBs in the AFC East, at the very least, he's going to draw some attention away from the other receivers on the team, allowing them to make plays, even if the rookie himself may not be doing so on a consistent basis. It might indirectly lead to an additional 10 TDs next year and that's worth a lot, especially on a team that scored only 20 TDs offensively last year.

Agreed. Whitner was certainly considered a 'reach', while some thought Lynch was as well.

That seems to be the logic, alright. I don't get it, either. If that first group of WRs can't play, neither can the second. IMO, The Bills would be better off waiting until the middle of the draft to pick a WR in that scenario. In fact, if they draft a CB or DE in R1, I'd rather they just draft the best receiving TE on the board in R2 and pick a WR project (or two) in R3-5. Your 2nd-3rd round guy very likely is not going to beat out Josh Reed or Roscoe Parrish this year anyway, so why even bother?

That's because a lot of people oversimplify. Its always a balancing act of need vs talent. You have to consider the group of talent that you can get in the first 3-4 rounds and whether drafting a lesser need in R1 prevents you from filling bigger needs with quality talent. As this appears to be a thin draft class, I think it very well might. If the Bills have a WR rated highly enough that they feel comfortable picking him at 11, they should just do it and be done with it, particularly if they aren't high on that second tier at the position. Of course, I still can't understand why the 1st round WRs suck and would be horrid picks, but these 2nd-3rd round guys will magically make this offense so much better.

Yes. He was predicting they'd pick Whitner about a week before it happened. He missed it last year, though.

The entire article: http://buffalobills.com/news/news.jsp?news_id=5996

Another possible translation: "Lee doesn't want to re-sign with the Bills until we actually give him some help by adding another quality receiver or two. Afterall, why would he want to waste his career facing constant double and triple teams and catching 50 passes and 5 TDs every year?"