Shaw66

Well, this certainly is true, but .... First, there's always the chance for the diamond in the rough to appear. UDFAs make NFL squads all the time, including Levi Wallace. Second, I'm increasingly impressed with how much players love the environment in Buffalo. They love the facilities and the hometown feel, of course, but they also really appreciate the supportive culture, the culture that really does offer them the opportunity to become the best version of themselves. They develop their skills in Buffalo, and they make friends in Buffalo, and when they leave for other teams, they come to appreciate how powerful their experience was in Buffalo. So, yes, guys will learn and develop on the Bills' practice squad and then leave for a spot on someone else's roster, but as we've seen with Shaq and Phillips, the experience in Buffalo actually draws guys back. In that sense, these UDFAs are a long-term investment.

They both have to make it to the field, but if they do, the speed upgrade to the offense is a real problem for defenses. Some combination Diggs, Cook, Shakir, and McKenzie is going to outrun most defenses. However, that's a decent sized "if." Cook has to be able to pass block and learn the offense, Shakir has to be able to learn the offense and run block. McDermott is a demanding coach, and these guys aren't hitting the field until they've shown they can play the complete position. And that is why McDermott's and Beane's focus on the team orientation and work ethic of players is so important. They don't draft guys who don't have the fire burning within them to get better, and if Cook and Shakir have it, we should have a lot of fun this season.

Running back is an interesting problem. You're looking for a possession run, I was pleased that they got a potential break-away threat. In some ways it points out that Singletary is a problem. He's a real tweener. He isn't an inside pounder, but he has some ability to break tackles. He doesn't have the great speed or quickness that makes him a flashy runner. He just does everything pretty well. So, you want a guy with more power, I wanted a guy who can beat people at the line of scrimmage and leave the defense in the dust. A power runner is nice on third and short, and Moss has disappointed somewhat in that category. I like Cook, because he increases the matchup nightmare that is the Bills' offense. Cook like like the Bills can put him on the field in third and short, and the defense has a bigger problem than if the Bills have a possession runner in the lineup. Yes, Cook will not get you three yards on his own, but he forces the defense to be prepared for him to split wide and either run a pass pattern or motion back to the backfield, where he can take advantage of any seam the line creates. Or he can line up in the backfield and either motion out or run pass patterns from the backfield. I'm not saying one is better than the other - I would have been happy with a true power back, too. But I think I like the direction the Bills went.

I gave it a B. First, the 6th and 7th round left me underwhelmed. Even the punter - he takes a lot steps before hitting the ball, he has a big leg but isn't consistent, and he apparently has no experience holding place kicks. All of that tells me that he MAY be the answer, but he may be another problem at that position. The other guys don't seem to bring much to the table. Of course, the 6th and 7th round doesn't make the draft. I really like Elam in the first. I don't know much about any of the picks, but I like a first-round corner. If Elam can play, and it looks like he can, the Bills are looking at having first-round picks at both corners for the next three or four years. That's a huge advantage. If Elam is ready to play full-time, even by the middle of the season if not day 1, and if White comes back, it means the Bills will have one of the best safety tandems and one of the best corner tandems in the league. Combine that with the subtle complexities of how the Bills play defense back there, and they will be all set for the playoffs. Oh, and they'll have #40 rushing the passer. Cook, I'm taking a wait and see approach. He could be absolutely explosive in the offense, between his pass catching abilities and his speed out of the backfield, but his videos leave me less than thrilled, particularly out of the backfield. He's more of a one cut and go guy, actually sort of like Singletary, but less shifty and faster. In past years, I've thought the guy the Bills took in the second was going to play almost immediately - Cook doesn't give me that feeling. Bernard may be a brilliant pick. He may have more impact than Cook. He MAY be. He also may become a failed experiment. In the fourth round - oh, yeah - no fourth round pick. Like others, I was disappointed to see the Bills use the pick to move up just two spots in the first round, but I get it. As I said, Elam may be a really important addition to the team for the next several years, and it was important to get him. As the picks were coming in, Beane had to trust his gut, and he decided he needed to make the move. I'm not going to second-guess it, and I'll actually give Beane credit, again, for being fearless in the draft. He makes the moves that he thinks he needs to make. And even if I didn't completely like the trade up, the two trade downs in the second were very clever - he still got Cook, and he reloaded the day three draft, which allowed him ... ... to move up to top of round five and ***** Shakir. I'm not doing cartwheels over Shakir. First, how good can he be if he fell to the fifth? Well, it was borne out that this draft was deep in receivers - teams kept picking them, so maybe Shakier is just one guy in a very deep class. Still, no one wanted him in four rounds. Second, although his highlight reel catches are impressive, apparently there are a lot of drops that didn't make the highlight reels, so I'm not so sure he's a really good ball catcher. That's essential. And what I really wanted to get out of the draft for the offense is more speed, and if Cook and Shakir both are good enough to win playing time, the speed problem has been solved. Logic said something about this yesterday - if those guys make it, look at the problems the Bills will pose to defenses when they line up with all sorts of skill players: Two tight ends, Diggs, Shakir, and Cook. Five wide with Diggs, Davis, McKenzie, Shakir, and Cook. Mix in Singletary and/or Crowder. There's a lot of dangerous firepower on the field in almost any kind of configuration. But Shakir has to make it first, and Cook. I have the same problem with grades that most everyone does. When the Bills are picking late every round, it's very difficult to fill up their card with impressive names, like the Jets were able to do. Late in every round, you have to be making bigger bets, and that's how I view Cook, Bernard, and Shakir. They're all bets. If Beane bet right, this will be an A or even an A+ draft. If he bet wrong, it will be a C. For now, I'm guessing he'll win some and lose some, and I'll give him a B on the result. However, if I'm going to grade him on how he handled the draft, as opposed to whom he got, I'll give him an A. He managed his picks very well, and he got guys who could have big impact on the team over the next few seasons.

I don't think so, but who knows? If Daboll wanted to throw more quick stuff, I don't think Allen would have said "I can't throw those." I think they would have practiced it and Allen would have made the throws. But as I said, who knows? You may be right, because throws certainly are not his strength.

It isn't an accident that the Bills added two skill position players who can run all the options in the short passing game. Cooke and Shakir can juice up a quick passing attack that hasn't been very good. I don't think Beane would have targeted those two if Dorsey didn't intend to feature that style.

I think Logic had the better take. Crowder has the slot this season, with Shakir getting increasing snaps as the season progresses. Crowder is one season and done, if it works.

And I wanted to add something on a slightly different subject. This draft is, I think, an encouraging early sign that we're going to like Dorsey at OC. I think the vision of the offense Logic describes and that can be seen in the draft must be Dorsey's vision. Beane delivered what Dorsey and McDermott asked for. Do I know this for sure? Oc course not, but it's certainly the case that Beane and McDermott are listening to their OC when he says what he needs, and Beane views his job as getting the players the coaches need. I never thought Daboll was creative on offense. Sure, he always had a new gadget - he was creative that way. But I didn't think he was creative in terms of coming at a defense with a constant variety of strategies. This vision of quick, versatile players that can attack in multiple ways - they all can run deep, several run the jet sweeps, several can line up either in the backfield or wide, is more complex and more difficult to defend. Maybe Daboll just was limited by the players he had, but it didn't seem to me like he was good at developing multiple attacks. This seems like Dorsey is saying "give me more speed and versatility at the skill positions, and I'll give you an offense that can be breathtaking." Of course, it's one thing to have the vision; it's another to deliver it.

Logic - Thanks for the review. It's great! Insightful. Gives a good picture of what the Bills have done and implications for the future. Really good. You comment about the value of the picks, whether Bernard was worth where he was taken, etc. I'm not sure that really matters. First, Beane kind of has to go where the draft takes him. So, yes, it sure seems like the Bills wanted to add speed and versatility to the offense and defense, but because that seems to have been how the Bills viewed "value," there isn't any way to expect all the right players to fall to them at exactly the right times. That is, since what was "valuable" to them wasn't always there, they were trading up, trading down, and taking some guys a bit higher than they should have. That is, he may have "wasted" resources a bit. Given how he viewed "value," however, he didn't have much choice. And he seems to have gotten an excellent overall result. I haven't read any comments here yet; I'd be curious to know what Beane's critics would think of as better choices. I know, don't burn the fourth round pick to trade up, but that doesn't mean much. We don't know what would have happened had they stayed at 25, and who would have been a better pick? Who did the Bills miss without the fourth round pick? Beane got some real value back in the trade downs. The analysis could go on forever, and I'm sure some people could come up other plausible combinations of picks. That may be true, but what Beane did, although messy, looks pretty good. One other observation: We're all used to having someplace between the fifth and fifteenth spot in every round. Year after year that's what we were talking about. We got used to having drafts with high first rounders and high second rounders. When you win 12 games in the season, you find that picking at the bottom of those rounds is much different. It's easy to be disappointed with Beane's draft, because he kept missing out on the big names, but Beane's job is different when his placement in the draft doesn't allow to get those big names. His job is more difficult now. It looks like he did a solid job, but his margin for error is narrower now. It's easier to have a bad year when you're picking 25th. I don't think he did, but time will tell. I think all that matters is does Beane get an A, a B, or a C. Three or four years from now is the time to give the real grade. For now, I'd call it a solid B, maybe B+, with some real downside but maybe better upside. That is, the offensive help we expect might not materialize, and corner may continue to be a weakness. But if the Bills come out of this with four new contributors in 2022, two on offense and two on defense (and I see that as a real possibility), then it's solid A.

I think that's McDermott's model. I think that's who Bernard is, too. Forget what you call the player's position. Just get really good football players and put them on the field. Speed, height, and versatility.

He seems to take a lot of steps before striking the ball.

So, I've popped in and out of this thread, read some posts, considered various objections, and I'll say that I found the pick perplexing, too, for many of the same reasons people raised here: size, need, etc. I've come to one conclusion: Each and every objection that people raise to the Bernard pick was known to and understood by McDermott and Beane, and they took the guy anyway. These guys are, as we all know, not stupid. Now, it's possible that they've made a mistake in their evaluation of the guy, and he will turn out not to have much value to the team. And that may be the opinion of some people on this board, and their opinion may prove to be right. I never put a lot of stock in those opinions, because the coaches and scouts have a lot more information than we do, so those opinions usually aren't based on nearly as much information as McBeane have. Still, maybe those people are right. So, what is going on here? Fundamentally, I think McBeane decided that the guy is just too good of a football not to add to the team. He's athletic, smart, team-oriented, and a tireless worker. In other words, he is the quintessential McDermott guy. What is McDermott's plan for him? I'd guess that he has ideas, but he doesn't have a single plan. Maybe the guy takes Milano's job in a year or two, and the Bills trade Milano. Maybe he takes MIlano's job, MIlano moves to the middle, and the Edmunds experiment ends. In the short term, I'm guessing that he takes Klein's spot, and although he lacks the run stopping ability Klein brought, he adds speed, so the defense can be more versatile in how it attacks. Bernard will rush the passer. He will, as others have said, occasionally play in place of the nickel or dime back, because he can cover but he can do other stuff, too, so the Bills' intentions will be masked. For example, if he's on the field in place of Johnson, he might be assuming the run-defense responsibility of one of the safeties, who in turn will be in pass coverage. He almost certainly will take a role on the special teams, with the potential to be a star there. In short, I think Bernard is another (I hate the phrase) Swiss army knife. He's a good football player whom McDermott wants on the field. McDermott's pass defense schemes are somewhat ahead of the league, generally, and I think McDermott thinks Bernard may be the prototype for a different defender, a guy who's a combo linebacker/safety who's also a pass rusher. I don't know, but I am sure there are very good reasons why Bernard is now a Buffalo Bill.

Well, I believe that I teach asked the Pegulas to fire the other, Beane would go, but I dont know it with certainty you express. How do you know this?

I agree. McBeane didn't take this guy without having a vision for him. He's a playmaker, and McDermott will find ways for him to make plays.

Yes. That means in the top 22 picks, 20 of Beane's picks came off the board. That's almost universal agreement, although we don't know how many guys other teams still had on their boards.

For sure. They probably had him 20th or something like that. They trade up when they see a guy who in their opinion should already be gone. McBeane make moves like this when they feel strongly about a guy. I came into the draft hoping they'd trade up, because that means there's a guy they really want. Getting a corner they really want is great. He'll need to learn a lot, but right out of the gate he's probably better than Wallace or anyone the Bills have now. He probably starts with Dane Jackson, and in November the Bills will have a seasoned rookie and Tre White at corner. Nice.

The Bills don't draft the highest rated guy on YOUR board. They take the highest on THEIR board.

I don't know what they'll take, but it makes perfect sense to take a corner in round 1. It's more or less exactly the same as the reason you might take a wideout in round 1. If you can get a #1 corner or a #1 wide receiver, he's a perfect #2 at low cost for four years, about the time that you will be looking at the decline or end of careers for Diggs and White. It will be exactly the time to give the guy #1 money. And in general, I think it doesn't make much sense to say they've never done it, so they won't. I think Beane's shown he'll do whatever he thinks makes sense. Did Beane ever trade a #1 for a veteran before Diggs? Did he ever sign a HOF edge before he signed MIller? I'm way past trying to predict Beane, except to say that he's likely to do the unexpected.

Please. Now you should just stop. You're NOT just pointing out that he's in a statistically elite club. You've been saying over and over that BECAUSE he's a member of an elite statistical club he WILL be great. And that, my friend, is a conclusion based on false logic. He may be great, he may not be, but your data doesn't prove it. Is your data interesting? Sure, in same way hundreds of stats that are spouted on TV are interesting. It proves nothing.

I think it's the opposite. You're correct, it is the same as KC drafting CEH. They saw that he fit very nicely in what they were trying to do. I will be thrilled if the Bills have reached the same conclusion about Hall and take him. But our fearless leader here isn't telling us Hall is CEH. He's saying he's on a par with Edgerrin James and a couple of other Hall of Famers. CEH was a great fit for the Chiefs, but he's not a Hall of Fame player or anyplace close. Hall may be a great fit for the Bills, but that's a completely different proposition than Hall is a probable Hall of Famer who somehow is likely to fall to 25.

Yes, but you're telling us it is completely obvious that this guy will be a star. Why would 32 teams miss it? And if they ARE missing it, then it's not because of your metrics, because they have all the metrics. If it's not because of the metrics, then there's no reason for us to believe he'll be great just because you say he'll be great. You're perfectly free to have the opinion you have, but your opinion is not some kind statistical certainty that you and only you can see.

Wait. You have figured this out. If it is so clear, the guy is not lasting to 25. Or 20. He's gone in the top 10 picks. So, why did you start a thread that says the Bills should taken him at 25? Let's take Jerry Rice at 25, also. And maybe Orlando Pace. They're all likely to be sitting there at 25, too. Either the NFL agrees with you, in which case he'll go in the top 10, or the NFL doesn't agree with you, in which case you are quite likely to be wrong. Just posted it!

Okay. Am I done now?

Okay, I'll do my part. The chances are NOT high that the Bills will get three great years out of this guy. You simply cannot prove that, particularly when your proof is essentially one data point compared to one data point for a bunch of other guys. You may be right, but his probability of success is not nearly as high as you'd have us believe. I was in a discussion yesterday about Williamson. Someone told me to watch a discussion of talking heads about how could he is. They said top 4 in the draft, absolutely. I looked at video of Williamson playing. You know what I saw? Sammy Watkins. I don't care what measureables the guy has, nobody is going to convince me on stats that the guy is about to become an all-time great receiver. And you are not going to convince on a stat that Hall is Edgerrin James. I watch the Hall highlights and ask myself this question: Is this guy as good as Dalvin Cook? To my eyes, no, and the guy is playing against Big 12 (or whatever conference) talent.

I've posted two or three times. Have I done my part?