Shaw66

Someone asked Beane how this draft was different from drafts a couple of years ago. He said the main difference is that he and his staff now have a really solid understanding of what McDermott and the coaches want and need. They know what kinds of players fit best into what the coaches are trying to build. There's such consistency, apparently, in how McDermott runs his side of the house that Beane's side can focus better on players that are what the coaches want. That's why, as you say, McDermott can trust him implicitly - because Beane view his job as giving McDermott what he needs, even to the extent that Beane may know better than McDermott what he needs. If that's the kind of trust they have, and it seems they do, then maintaining that trust could lead to a long and happy marriage. I've only looked at highlight videos, but I'll say that my first reaction to Rousseau was that he's an odd looking player. Unique. Not overpoweringly odd, like Clowney looked in college, just different. A guy who gets results in what looks like an unconventional way. Basham looks solid, but the two offensive tackles also look odd. How did the Bills get focused on two trees like that? Because they're athletes with the right competitiveness and work ethic, I know, but still, why not more conventionally sized guys? The answer is, I think, that Beane and McDermott continue to refine what they want, McDermott telling Beane the kind of characteristics he's looking for, Beane seeing how that could work and going after guys who fit the mold. And I think that kind of communication and understanding is helpful both in the early rounds (where the Bills might leave us scratching our heads with two DEs) and in the later rounds, where Beane can see that a physically unimpressive still may be the guy McDermott needs, a guy like Hamlin. I think it's fascinating to watch.

You know more about this than I, but I'd guess the Bills have more guys graded than that. Well, probably not graded, probably clustered. By that I mean they probably have a list of guys they have a sixth round grade on, a list of guys they have a seventh round grade on, without having ranked them individually within their cluster. Seven rounds, maybe 34 a round (with comp picks), is 230 to 250 guys being drafted; throw out maybe 50 the Bills know they aren't interested in (the top QBs and some bad apples) and it means the Bills need to know about 300 players. And they also need to have a good idea about another 100 from whom they're going to get undrafted free agents. So they must have evaluated and had a very clear take on 400 or 500 guys, even though they have ranked only 150. I was very interested in Beane's comment about the trade down - one fifth for two sixths. He said that the Bills are now at a disadvantage in the mad scramble for undrafted free agents, because agents tell their guys that they have less of a chance to make the Bills than to make other needs whose rosters aren't so strong. It's tougher for the Bills to sign the best undrafted free agents. The trade down was done to offset that disadvantage, to get one more quality athlete to compete in training camp and probably go to the practice squad, because it will be harder to get guys like that on Sunday after the draft. Maybe the Bills didn't have an actual number grade on those guys they took in the 6th and 7th, but you can be sure they were certain (in their minds) that they were 6th and 7th round ready.

Someplace in this thread or elsewhere I was in a little discussion about the possibility that Beane might leave one day. Some people seemed to think it was more or less impossible that he would leave unless McDermott was gone, too. I think what you say is a better explanation for why Beane might leave than I gave. I'm not exactly sure where the power is today. Clearly when Beane was hired it was in McDermott - the Pegs relied primarily on him to hire Beane. And McDermott is the high priest of the growth mindset, so far as I can tell, not Beane, and I think the Pegs are sold on that. I think in the war room on draft day, Beane has the final say. If he says it's Basham, it's Basham. But I think, and it sounds like you agree, if McDermott goes to the Pegulas and complains to them that he told Beane that he really, really didn't want another DE, that team would be stronger if the Bills went in a different direction in the second round, well, Beane might be in trouble. Maybe they'd smooth it over, but if it happened once more, or twice more, if they were regularly knocking heads on personnel decisions, I think the Pegulas would tell them that McDermott has a veto on the draft selections. If that happened, I'd think Beane would move on. If you believe that article from a couple of months ago, the Pegulas wanted Mahomes and Whaley and/or some of his staff wanted Mahomes. McDermott said no, for whatever reasons. It's hard to imagine that McDermott, having that veto power months after he arrived, willingly would give it up. It is another way that I think McDermott is similar to Belichick.

Please don't take the following comments as arguing. I'm not arguing about it - just talking and making some observations. First, I agree, it's fun and interesting to look at all kinds of rankings. They're great when they conclude something like Feliciano is the second best pass protecting guard in the league, and they're terrible when they say the Bills had the second worst tackling linebackers in the league, or whatever. Second, I've always distrusted the talking-head outsiders when they rank anything. The weekly power ratings are really stupid, in my opinion. (I still look at them.) And that goes for especially amateurs who make themselves into professionals, from Mel Kiper on down. Self-appointed experts. My distrust was confirmed a few years ago when Kyle Williams was being interviewed and he was told something like he had a 68% efficiency rating on running plays (I just made that up). Williams asked where that number came from and was told it came PFF or someplace, and he went off. First, he wasn't even aware of such ratings, which means that his team doesn't rely on that data at all - they generate their own data. Second, he asked how an outsider possibly could evaluate his efficiency on any play when he doesn't know what his assignment was, how that assignment might have been adjusted in the huddle, what the defense did that might have made executing more difficult than anticipated, etc. He literally laughed it off. So, if the pros completely ignore that kind of analysis, why should we pay attention to it? Still, it's fun. Third, the teams really, really don't care where their draft ranks among other teams. All they care about is their own objectives and how well they did against those objectives. You can tell that Beane just sloughs off questions that suggestion his team didn't get better as much as the Chiefs or the Browns. He may or may not believe that, but he just doesn't care. All that matters to him is making his team as good as he can make it. The Jets made themselves a whole lot better than the Bills did, because they didn't have a quarterback and now they do. I know, this list actually takes that into account in some way, but so what? Now, it's interesting that this approaches averages a lot of publicly available big boards. The philosophy is consistent with something I read recently. Apparently, if you fill a 5 gallon glass jug with gumballs and ask people to guess how many gumballs there are, you get guesses all over the place, some of which are wrong, sometimes by factors of 2, 3, 4. But if you have 10,000 people guess and you average all their guesses, the average consistently comes out close to the actual number of gumballs. So, it's possible that that phenomenon is at work here, and even though I think all these amateurs are idiots, maybe the average of all the idiots is actually meaningful. Now, if you gave me the average of the big boards of the 32 teams, I'd think you'd have a pretty good starting point. It actually would be kind of cool if the teams all agreed to show their big boards to some trusted third person, like some bigtime accounting firm. Strictly confidentially, so no one would ever see and be able to identify lists to teams, and let the firm do some number crunching and release the results. That would be interesting. For example: Take Rousseau. It's possible he was #30 on the Bills' board and 29 teams took the guys the Bills had at 1-29. That's extremely unlikely. It's much more likely that he was #20 or #25 and some other teams took guys who were over #30. I don't know exactly how the boards are put together, but obviously the Bills weren't taking a QB with their first pick, so there's five guys who totally objectively may have been a better value than Rousseau but whom the Bills weren't going to take. If you could analyze those kinds of situations for all of the teams and do some averaging, you could figure out, at least based on the collective judgment of 32 GMs, which team got the best talent in the draft. I just don't have a lot of confidence in the collective judgment of 70 Mel Kipers - unless the gumball example is actually true

Well, I always like seeing my team on the top of lists, saying they're excellent, but really? Someone thinks they can calculate draft success like this? I think it's comical. So much of what goes on in football is subjective, and these people are calculating stuff to five significant digits? I don't think so.

I don't understand odds, but wouldn't be $125?

$175?

Well, look. I enjoy your posts and rarely argue with you. But the fact is that "my quarterback is better than your quarterback" is a valid and sufficient argument to support the position that your wrong. It's no less valid than the "the total talent on my team is better than the total talent on your team." When the argument comes down to those points, there's nothing left to talk about - it's just a difference of opinion. As I said in my post, I also thing the Bills have a coaching edge, because I don't think anyone is as thorough and as detailed as McDermott and his crew. One reason I think the Bills did so well last year is that by being hyper-organized, McDermott was much better able to adjust to COVID rules on the fly. He accepts every challenge and masters it. I've been saying for two years now that fans should enjoy the ride. The Bills have a truly outstanding combination of owners, GM, head coach, and quarterback. That's what makes me think the Bills can be the best in the conference every year, starting this year.

Right. And underestimating the coaching. Obviously, no one knows something like this for a certainty, but I think the Bills are one of a few teams with the potential to be the best team in the conference. KC, Cleveland, Titans. I like where we are.

Yes, I think that would be part of it. Maybe more of a business role, like President and GM. I don't know, but I've just had this feeling that he's a really competitive guy and wants to be the top dog. The vision in Buffalo is that there is a team of four people in charge - the Pegs, Beane and McD. Maybe he will be happy for the long term being part of a winning team. I just have had the sense that he will want more. McD, on the other hand, is totally a team guy and I have trouble seeing him taking the same approach. However, we've seen plenty of occasions where coaches have come to disagree with the GM about personnel selections, and I could imagine that happening with McD and Beane. On the other hand, in his presser Sunday, Beane said something like "you'll see the Bills go after big guys in the trenches as long as Sean and I are here," so what do I know?

It won't be money. It will be ego

When they came u got the sense that they aren't joined at the hip. They're their own men, individually. Beane is intensely competitive, personally, and I just suspect he may eventually want a bigger role for himself. In Buffalo je is trapped between the Pegs and McD, and some other owner might offer him more power.

Thanks. That sounds exactly right.

Gunner - Thanks for your draft coverage it's great stuff. I agree that it's possible that some of the late round and free agent DBs could make the final 53, but in any case some of them will be on the practice squad, may be late-season injury-fill-in call ups with a more serious shot to make it in 2022. Whatever. I haven't heard Beane's day-3 presser, but as you report it, he said what he's said over and over - early rounds are for BPA and late rounds are to fill needs. Early round are to get guys at whatever position who look like they could be long-term starters - yes, he did a bit of combo-BPA-need pick in the first round, it was still BPA. Late round guys are prospects who can help in the short-term and may develop. Beane's really disciplined about this, and that's what causes some head-scratching with fans when he takes two edge players in the first two rounds. So, there's something of a roster traffic jam on the edge now, but too much talent is a good problem to have, especially when there are no glaring holes elsewhere. One thing I like about Beane's drafts is how unpredictable they are are. These huge offensive linemen, two quality DEs. A placekicker and Fromm last year, the multiple trade-ups for Allen and Edmunds, the Diggs trade. He'll do whatever seems to him to add the best talent and the right talent. One final comment is how increasingly Bills draftees say, in way or another, "I'm just here to do whatever I can do to make this team get better. I'm ready to get to work, right now." Maybe they're all just well coached by their agents who know by now that's the mantra, but I'm guessing it's genuine. This is nicely stated. There's certainly some minimum level of athleticism needed, but it seems a lot of guys meet that minimum. I'll admit, however, that I have a concern about it, which is that those guys tend to be better in zone than man. When you hit a team that forces you to play more man coverages, you tend to be at a physical disadvantage. I suppose McDermott's answer to that is "that's why I have to have a front four that generates consistent pressure - my DBs can't stay with those receivers for too long."

And I wonder if someday Beane's head will get big enough that he'll leave for someplace where choosing the HC IS within his paygrade.

I mean, who knows? That may be a possibility. What I do know is that except for a few very special leaders, like Kyle, McBeane aren't keeping you around if you don't fit into the plan, and the plan is both short-term and long-term. They were ready to let Milano walk and they didn't even have a guy behind him, so I'm going to assume that Dawkins couldn't get pushed off the roster by one of the guys the Bills drafted this week. I'm not saying he will. But my original point was that three years from now we could look back at this draft and see five or even six guys who are starters for the Bills. Any draft that yields that many starters is a good draft, and it's particularly good when it happens on a team that already has a lot of talent. I wrote a little about this last night, in a different way. I get that you're looking at it from the future-is-now perspective, but I guess my style is to get comfortable with the approach that Bills management may be taking at any given time. Some other regimes were more future-is-now, but these guys have been completely clear that they are not at all in that camp. Their stated objective was to get good and stay good. They already got good, not quite good enough, but pretty darn good, and this draft was about staying good.

Well, I can't imagine they'd cut him. They might trade him. I don't know what the cap consequences would be in a trade.

Thanks, but I doubt you're correct when it comes to McBeane. We'll just have to wait and see, but McBeane have been very clear that every position is up for grabs every year. Just because they like their left tackle today doesn't mean that he's a ten-year fixture. Maybe I'm missing something, because Dawkins hasn't struck me as a HOF tackle, just a good one. What protects players, long-term, for McBeane, is leadership. If Dawkins is one of the four or five leaders on the team in three years, then it will be tough to move him out. Otherwise, I wouldn't say that he's a sure thing. But I hear you point.

It would mean that Dawkins was expendable, because there was younger cheaper talent. Losing Dawkins in that way is exactly how the Patriots lost talent year after year. They didn't hold on to their talented people, they let them move on.

I trust McBeane. Their judgment is, every year, to add the best talent they can. They don't want to go into the draft with any pressing need, and this draft is a prime example. They saw no reason to chase a guard or a center, and that's good enough for me. These guys are drafting exactly like they said they would. Build a talented team, then add talent in the draft every year. This was the first draft where they did that in spades.

There's a long way to go. They still may get one in a trade, late cuts. They have a plan, no doubt.

Whoops. I should have proofread. I fixed it.

Comp picks and trades. Just keep piling up talent, let McDermott figure out how to use it well. As you say, it's a good problem to have.

I've been in and out of this thread since it started. Haven't read everything. While I was away, I had this thought: How will you feel if in three years the Bills are starting two defensive ends, two tackles and a guard from this draft?

Right. The Bills are satisfied with what they have. They want to get better, but they didn't think they had critical, immediate needs.