Shaw66

Thanks. Thanks. Thanks for posting this. Watch it if you get a chance. Several reactions. I remember when he got the scholarship offer. Didn't know he was the guy. Kiffen's done a lot of stupid stiff in his career. Beane and McDermott live smart, and Stills is smart. They love determination and this guy has it, He's a good bet to take Zay's roster spot this year or Beasley's in three. Allen is going to love him, because he is a route runner. He will always be where he is supposed to be. And he has quarterback hands. McBeane live these guys. Smart, determined. Doesn't quit. If you haven't seen the ESPN piece, look for it. It's worth it Thanks to everyone who posted about where we could find it.

That's a really insightful commentary. I hadn't thought about the Allen angle - acquire a legitimate franchise qb prospect without mortgaging the future. I think Beane is one talented dude.

Look, I don't know Singletary, but I think concluding he doesn't have it based on the Oklahoma game is off base. First, Oklahoma had a lot of trouble tackling him. His shifting as beat several OU defenderz, and he was breaking tackles. Second, his TEAMMATES are the guys who play at the Bethune Cook man level, and THEY are the ones who were over matched against OU. THEY were the ones who couldn't make the blocks against NFL caliber defenders. I wonder whether Singletary can take the pounding he will get in the NFL. I'm not worried about 63 yards against Oklahoma.

Hits the hole, makes the cut and takes off. Interesting prospect.

Right. A 3-4 DE isn't an edge rusher; the guy who lines up outside him is. Mario Williams was an edge rusher in the 4-3, and Kyle William's was a 3 tech tackle, the natural positions for both. When they switched to the 3-4, Mario was wasted as a DE and couldn't play OLB. Kyle was out of position as a nose tackle. Edge rusher now means a guy who will play DE in 4-3 or OLB in the 3-4. Some guys fit either scheme, some fit only one.

Yes! And pink in October!!!

I've mentioned this before, and we saw it again last night. McD was asked about it agreed - he wants to be strong up the middle. That's at the core of what he wants to do, and Beane is on the same page. Since McD has arrived: Hyde, Poyer, Edmunds, Lotulelei, Oliver, Morse, Allen. McBeane's highest draft picks and biggest contracts have gone right up the middle.

Yeah. I knew next to nothing about the top rated guys. I'd see Oliver's name mentioned, with people saying no way he'd last to 9, and maybe Beane would trade up for him. So some Metcalf talk, and all the Hock talk. So when the pick came and they took Oliver, at least I knew his name. A half hour later I came here to see what people were saying, scrolled through the thread about the first pick, and I was amazed at the consistent, almost unanimous enthusiasm for the pick. There's an interesting mathematical rule that says if you take a lot of people, none of whom have any special information or knowledge, and ask them to estimate the number of gumballs in a large jar, they're individual guess are all over the place. Some way too high, some way to low. But apparently if you average all the guesses, the average comes out really close to the actual number. That is, the collected wisdom of a lot of people usually is pretty much on the money. If that rule applies here, it seems like the Bills got a good one. I, for one, think it's really cool to have gotten a guy who could be as important to the long-term history of the franchise as the guy who's shoes he's been drafted to fill. I'd like to have back-to-back all-star QBs, like the Colts did, but if I can't get QBs, back-to-back all-star D tackles is pretty nice.

That would be quite cool. But those are BIG animals, and I wonder how they'll handle them. Another angle - the bisons replace the Jills?

Gotta love the Pegulas, Beane and McDermott. What a nice thing to do. And gotta love Pancho. Dressed for the draft.

I gotta say that in a world where people seem desperate to be the first with any story, this is a refreshingly old-fashioned approach. Thanks. Okay, so what's REALLY going on?

Mr. Castro - Bills fans everywhere are with you and your family. Your legend will live forever.

Here! Here! Beane might not pick your guy, but he's very unlikely to make any four base errors, either. No Aaron Maybins or Walt Patulskis on his board. The Bills are going to be a better football team tomorrow morning. And they'll be even better Saturday morning.

I'm sold on Beane, until he misses badly on picks in the first two rounds, and it will take at least the rookie season to know if he missed. So I have no nightmare scenarios. My reaction tonight will be that whomever he takes will make the team better, and that's good enough for me. Everything is different once you have your QB.

Right, but the Hock supporters say (I don't know this myself, but they say it) that the reason Hock is unusual and worth the pick is that he's all three rolled into one, which is what Gronk was. Your offense has great options if the tight end you put on the field does all three. It allows for your QB to check from a power running play to a pass play and vice versa, and have a right personnel on the field at tight end either way. In fact, that's one of the things that made the Patriots offense so devastating. When the offense had a good mismatch against a small D, they'd go hurry up and run the ball, not allowing the D to substitute. When they caught the D in a big, slower run-stopping defense, they'd go hurry up and pass multiple plays in a row. They could do both equally well with Gronk on the field. You're right, the roster IS set up to do TE by committee, and that's not bad. But instead of Croom, it's better if your pass catching tight end is more like Witten or any of the lesser but solid tight ends, who are excellent route runners and at least decent blockers. And those guys are also better than a Fisher, who (at least so far as we know, is likely to be more of a third offensive tackle. It will be great if he's a real route running threat, but I'm not holding my breath.

This an exceptionally interesting point. It may be correct, which means my view of the value of TEs is simply out of date. Put another way, the TE is now a more integral part of the passing game, so the TE can have value more like a wideout's impact. I'm still not sure that's correct, but that's just me being my stubborn self.

Edelman has nice punt-return man quickness and change of direction. That's a real skill. But all you see from Edelman are the plays where the scheme gives him a favorable one on one matchup, especially against linebackers, but not necessarily. That favorable matchup might just be what part of the field the defense is giving him. And it's almost always on very short routes. Longer routes, he doesn't have the speed to beat DBs, so he isn't much of a threat there. You don't see him creating space 15 yard sideline patterns. He's a talented guy, works his tail off, but he is a product of their scheme, just like Welker before him. Good punt return man who's in a scheme that suits his particular skills.

Did you see where I said the Bills need receivers who know how to run routes and hold on to the ball? I didn't say damn ball, but I could have. Gronk is freak who is a great runner for his size. I've already excepted Gronk from my discussion of drafting tight ends. Edelman is just a very good athlete who works and studies incredibly hard and gets open, yes, because of scheme. There are plenty of guys in the league with same ability to get open in the short game, but none of them plays in a scheme that takes advantage. Do you really think Edelman has that kind of success playing ANYWHERE else in the league. Patriot receivers are notoriously mediocre as soon as they leave Belichick and Brady.

I have to say I don't buy this "help out Allen" thing. What will help out Allen is (1) his continuing to learn how to read and recognize NFL defenses, (2) how to adjust the offense to what he sees in the defenst and (3) getting him an offensive line that protects him and supports a decent running game. If he has those thinks, the Bills just need to have receivers who know how to run routes and hold on to the ball. Receivers get open based on scheme, and a well-run offense with a QB who knows what he's looking at always gets a receiver open somewhere. Sure, a stud TE or a stud #1 wideout makes life easier for a QB, but a stud receiver can't cover for an inadequate QB nearly as well as a stud QB can cover for an inadequate receiver. Allen HAS to be good, and getting a receiver to "make" him good is a bogus concept.

If the Bills take Hock at 9, I'll be delighted, because it will mean that the Bills see all the things you see, and they have validated their conclusion with investigation of all the other factors that they value and can evaluate. If they take Hock at 9, I'm pretty certain that he will be starting by the time he gets to the middle of his rookie season. And I'll be fine with that. I just think the Bills' BPA is much more likely to be a lineman. I think it's hard for any TE to BPA at 9. Maybe Hock is the exception.

Two things: 1. I don't expect to convince you or anyone else about this. I've taken the same position about tight ends for at least 10 years. I think I'm right, but I rarely convince anyone who thinks otherwise (on this or any other subject). 2. I haven't spent one minute watching Hock (I don't even know what his full name is), and I've read no scouting reports about him. You and others may be correct; he may the best tight end in the history of football, or at least on a par with Gonzalez and Gronk. I understand that. If he IS that guy, then by all means, he should be taken at 9. However, he has to be all of that, he has to be THAT good, to change your team long-term. If he isn't THAT good, then there's a higher probability that some lineman (O or D) you can draft at 9 will be more valuable to your team long-term. That makes the TE pick at 9 high-risk, high reward. As I said, one of my rules for success in the draft is "don't miss with your first-round pick." A high-risk, high-reward guy increases the chances you will miss, and that hurts the team long-term. I'm just not willing to bet on a tight end.

I agree. I think it's easy to fall in love with the best NFL tight ends, because they seem to make a lot of plays, but in the grand scheme I think it's unusual for a tight end to be a major long-term impact player for your team. Look at Graham when he went to Seattle. He was going to make their offense devastating. The reality is it's tough for a TE to be the guy who drives the offense. I don't know about BADO's list, only because I'm not even sold on wideouts. Other than QB, shut-down corner and an occasional safety, I don't think skill position players have the impact on the team that linemen and linebackers do. I think BPA is defined in part by importance to the team. Not in terms of need, just in terms of how important the position is the schemes you're running. I think more or less every coach will tell you that the overall strength of his offensive line and his defensive line is more important than the overall strength of his receiver room. That translates into this: if you have a receiver prospect and an offensive line prospect, and their potential to be All-Pro is exactly equal, the lineman is your BPA. Not because you have a need, but because your team is better served long-term with a star lineman than a star receiver. And I put tight end behind the wideouts in that analysis. So I think it's hard for a TE to be your BPA at 9. The position just isn't as important as some others. In other words, I think a tight end who is worth a pick at 9 just isn't as important to the team as an offensive tackle who is worth a pick at 9.

I agree with this, except I think it's extremely hard to prove. The pro-TE folks aren't buying it. I've pretty much come around to the view that the winning formula is to have a franchise QB and have good total talent on the team, regardless of the rest of the positions. That's Belichick's approach. Shut-down corner is about the only position where he really wants a special talent. I think McB are following this approach. They want really good athletes dedicated to their team concept, and they want to get better every day, every week, every year. Year by year they upgrade the talent by taking the most talented players available to them. And in evaluating talent, I think they factor in the positions that players play. We had a brief discussion a couple weeks ago about how a guy who is a spectacular 3-4 LB prospect needs to be evaluated based on his importance to the team in the scheme the team plays, so no matter how good he is in the 3-4, the question is how good will he be in the 4-3. That is, 3-4 skills aren't fundamental to how the Bills play football. The extreme, silly example is the best punter in the history of football may be in the draft class, but he isn't your BPA because punting isn't fundamental to how you play football. Similarly, unless you're going to do what Belichick did with Gronk and Hernandez, tight end isn't fundamental to how the Bills want to play football. Protecting to the quarterback is fundamental. Getting at the other QB is fundamental. Having a HOF tight end isn't any more important to the Bills' philosophy than a HOF OLB or a HOF wideout. Taking a shot at the potential of a tight end makes more sense than taking a shot at a first-round punter, but it makes less sense than taking a shot at the potential in a lineman.

This is quite interesting. I'm not sure it's correct, but it has logic on its side. So it follows that the smart move in looking for tight ends is to draft one in later rounds and keep doing it until one turns into a star. And look for a star in free agency. In the meantime, what you need is a guy (exactly the kind of guy McDermott loves) who will spend all of his time and energy and whatever athletic ability he has learning all the difficult stuff you describe. That guy likely will be as productive as a first-round, future Pro Bowl guy while the future Pro-Bowl guy is learning all the stuff he has to learn. This analysis brings me back to a conclusion I reached several years ago, which is that tight end just isn't that important a position that it makes sense to use an early first-round choice on one. It's not so much that the position isn't important, because it's become more important in the past 10 years; it's just that you get better value at other positions high in the first-round. It just isn't very likely that you're going to find a tight end high in the first round who is going to change your team in his first two or three years. Sure, you MIGHT find a Gronk, but you can get a good offensive tackle high in the first round, and he's going to play for you from day one and make an impact on your team. The chances of finding a Gronk, who impacts your team from day one, are pretty small. I know fans love one tight end coming out, but I'll be disappointed if that's the Bills' pick at 9. I mean, if he's the pick, I'm sure Beane will know what he's doing, but I view a tight end pick at 9 as a high risk proposition. With a much higher likelihood of success, you can get an offensive or defensive lineman at 9, and I believe that success in the first round is one of the most important principles in good team building. QB is the only position that merits a high-risk, high-reward approach in the first round. Spiller and Maybin were high-risk, high-reward, and those picks impacted the Bills' future for years.

I get this. Thanks. I've always said the draft is like Christmas morning. And it's true, there's some regret every year. It killed me for the few moments between the announcement that the Bills had traded up, not knowing whether they would take Watkins or Mack. I wanted both. Bills got that one wrong. Last year I didn't have a problem. Once the first two QBs were gone, my head kept telling me "Rosen." Then the trade up happened, and my heart took over. "Allen! Allen! Allen!" I wanted the big body and the big arm for Christmas, and I was rewarded. Maybe you just have to wait and get a little older. I'm finding I have lost interest in the draft. I don't know who the best players are (except from a few discussions I've read here), and (as always) I'm following the lead of the Bills' brain trust. Beane says he's going BPA, his team will do their homework and pick a guy. I'm confident they will get a good one. (No reason for the confidence other than he seems to have done pretty well so far, and I'm always inclined to trust whoever the guy is - Polian, Nix, Whaley, Beane. And I've stopped worrying about the ones who got away. One thing I like about McD is that he preaches that it's not about the other teams, it's about the Bills. It's about the talent the Bills assemble and their dedication to a process designed to build a winning franchise. All those other guys are just obstacles who get in the way of the Bills' objective. That's in the nature of things. Just get a good guy tomorrow night, or two. And get two good guys, maybe three, the second night. Just keep adding good guys.