glazeduck
-
Posts
966 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by glazeduck
-
-
1 minute ago, NewEra said:
Agreed. Would love to land 2. Which picks are you willing to give up in next years draft? 5th-7ths won’t move the needle too much
Kind of depends on how tonight breaks out... ideally you can play the Ravens' game and let 2 quality players fall to you. If you assume my math is accurate, really only means 12 picks between 33 and our pick in the 3rd that have to be "off" and we'd have our choice of that list. But obviously that doesn't incorporate need, runs, flags on players, etc.
I'd be open to moving anything from our 3 down for the right player/pick, but that'd need to be a pretty big swing...
-
1
-
-
Just now, YoloinOhio said:
I don’t see any reason to take another corner tonight
You can certainly make that argument. I think if you look at the way the league is trending, our impending need at safety, how we use our safeties and the fact that said safeties are both converted CBs, I think there's an easy enough argument to be made for at least including them in the discussion.
-
2
-
-
We've got 2 picks in the next 57 selections. From those spots, it feels likely that at least 4 QBs will go, I'll conservatively say 11 DL go, and we could conceivably find use for picks at just about every position. So that means 2 picks in the next 42 with any real consequence to our roster building. I see a pretty clear tier of quality guys and then... less-so guys. Here's hoping we can figure out a way to get 2 of these 30 (qbs/dl removed)...
Breece Hall
Kenneth Walker
George Pickens
Christian Watson
Skyy Moore
Alec Pierce
Jalen Tolbert
John Metchie
Trey McBride
Bernhard Raiman
Rasheed Walker
Nic Petit-Frere
Sean Rhyan
Dylan Parham
Darrian Kinnard
Jamaree Salyer
Nakobe Dean
Christian Harris
Leo Chenal
Chad Muma
Troy Anderson
Channing Tindall
Brian Asamoah
Andrew Booth
Kyler Gordon
Roger McCreary
Tariq Woolen
Jalen Pitre
Jaquan Brisker
-
3
-
3
-
-
5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:
Speaking of Seattle where is @FFadpecr? I will never criticise someone for having a strong (see what I did there?) opinion but he was basically completely unwilling to listen to any argument that the Seattle Seahawks were not going to draft Carson Strong at #9 overall. If you are gonna go in that strong you need to come back and eat crow when you miss.
If it were literally anyone else, I'd be DYING for Seattle to take Strong in the 2nd just so FFadpecr could come back and talk about how right his process was (regardless of how ludicrous it was), but John Schneider is too good of a person to wish that on...
-
5 minutes ago, MrEpsYtown said:
I like to look back at those “way too early next year mock drafts” that everyone posts like the day after the draft. He was the projected first round tight end before the season. So its projection. Bills have shown interest and it is totally worth a late round shot.Something's up with him, so certainly interviews may nix him entirely, but he's got talent, fix the other stuff and you've got a low investment chance at something solid.
-
1
-
-
On 4/3/2022 at 10:45 AM, FFadpecr said:
QB Carson Strong
Best QB in this draft class by a mile. A true NFL Franchise QB.
NFL comp: Carson Palmer with the clutch gene
Draft ceiling: #6 to Carolina
Likeliest destination: #9 to Seattle
Draft floor: #11 to Washington
Top 11 pick on April 28th.
@FFadpecr your day has arrived! Still feeling this confident in Strong???
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, blacklabel said:
Big Baller Beane does all sorts of wheeling and dealing on all three days. Thursday night he jumps up at least ten spots and finds a way to draft S Kyle Hamilton. Heck, he might even find a way to jump back into the first between 28-32 to snag RB Breece Hall. I also think he lands one of the two too TEs, either Otten or McBride. I lean McBride, I think they’ve met with him more. What else? Um, they also draft that LB out of Montana, Troy Andersen, that’s not a super bold prediction tho.
Anywho, yeah, I think Triple B is gonna move around a bunch and end up with four or five picks in the top 100-150 picks as opposed to seven picks from the whole group of 255. Stacked roster as it is, players taken in the later rounds would really be on the bubble for a roster spot.
I will straight up boo the pick if we end up with Cade Otten. That guy is NOT a quality NFL starting TE...
-
34 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:
I dont disagree at all about speed for speed's sake. That's why I say he has to be a player. If Hardman is an example, he can be found through round one and into 2, but not beyond that without a lot of luck.
But I don't think mismatches alone are what McBeane or I want. They want to stretch the field, so they need speed mismatches. McKenzie has some speed but not the receiver talent. They need a good receiver with deep speed.
I wasn't talking about finding a Hill. As I said, I'm not copying the Chiefs. What I said is their deep speed is the model. Bills need to do what the Chiefs did - spend draft capital on a guy like Hardman, rather than a shot in the dark like Stephenson.
Okay, go get speed, fine, but if the talent isn't there there's no sense in forcing it. To me it's a class of one in terms of difference-makers who are actually burners. My whole point is that I see no sense in using a valuable pick on a guy who doesn't move the needle just because he's fast. Either pivot your strategy and take a better player (ie. Pickens) or sign a fast free agent and use the draft pick elsewhere.
-
15 minutes ago, junior said:
Confused by a bit in this paragraph... are you saying that talent-wise, Byron Pringle and Mecole Hardman are comparable to Diggs? And that Davis is worse than them? Or are you purely saying speed-wise?
2 different statements. Pringle & Hardman were KC's 3/4/5 options. Diggs is somewhat comparable to Hill/Kelce, Davis is not.
-
18 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:
Not that I'm trying to unravel your debate, but I thought I'd add my two cents about what I'd be looking for. I don't know the prospects, so I can't put names to what I'm saying. And I'm not one who believes the Bills need to build to beat the Chiefs or look like the Chiefs, but I think the Chiefs are prototype when it comes to your #2 and #3. Hardman and Pringle. And yes, I think speed is the primary but not sole attribute. Hardman was sub 4.4 and Pringle 4.46. Diggs was 4.46. Davis was 4.54, and I think that's not quite good enough. Davis gets deep, yes, but he does it with deception. When he's on the field, corners aren't worried that he will outrun them to end zone.
Now, obviously speed alone isn't enough. The guy's got to have some other characteristics, and we can talk about those, but fundamentally you want two guys, and ideally three, who threaten to go deep whenever they're on field. McKenzie was 4.42, Beasley 4.49, many years ago, and that's why McKenzie stayed and Beas is gone (other reasons, too). But Diggs and guys like Davis don't give you the ability to attack nearly as well as Diggs and sub 4.4 guy who can play, a guy like Hardman.
McBeane have been very clear about two things: They want speed, and they want to attack the whole field. You need speed to attack the whole field. That's what Hardman and Pringle did for the Chiefs. Hill was the star, but those other two guys were running to open space a lot. Hill's gone and Pringle's gone, but Valdez-Scantling is there now - also sub 4.4.
So, I've thought for a couple of months now that a quality speed receiver is one guy the Bills might trade up for. As I said, I don't know the prospects, but if a speed guy they like falls to mid-teens, I'd be thrilled to see the Bills go up to get him. Or - Hardman was the 5th receiver taken in his draft - take the right guy at 25 or move up in the second round to get him.
If the Bills' top four wideouts are Diggs, Davis, McKenzie, and speed guy who's a quality receiver, the Bills can come at defenses with deadly combinations. Two wide plus Knox. Three wide and Knox. Four wide. Group them almost any way you want, and the defense has a dilemma. But the key to it is another guy who has the natural speed to get deep.
A lot of mostly good thoughts here, but I think by aligning player type to player type, you're overcomplicating things. First of all Pringle and Hardman are their 3 and 4 -- sometimes their 4 and 5 with Kelce and pass-catching RBs in the formations, so there's that. While Diggs is comparable in talent to those guys, Davis is not (so we're already losing in your apples:apples) AND it's underestimating the stress that Hill's freakish speed puts on the defense. Diggs might be the more polished/talented player, but he doesn't force the defense's hand like Hill does. So in many ways, to what you're saying, we're already -2.
If you want to identify speed, then fine. Yes, McBeane has said many times they'd like to get faster, and I believe them. But there's only so many talents like Hill out there. YES, you can find guys who run fast 40s, but that's not a particularly valuable skill if they don't have the route running ability, the ability to setup dbs, the hands, etc. If all we're looking for to make safeties respect Josh Allen nukes is a guy to run windsprints, then trade a 6th rd pick for Jalen Raeger or sign Will Fuller.
What we should be (and I think McBeane ARE) looking for, is guys who can create mismatches and strain defenses. As I mentioned, speed is one way, but there are others (again, already mentioned those).
To draft a guy early with a fast 40 because we have a slim chance at getting the guy we want feels VERY silly to me when there are more talented options who have better chances as panning out and providing advantages in other ways.
-
1
-
-
-
1 hour ago, gonzo1105 said:
So what are we looking for in your opinion? Your looking for a burner would be my guess. Someone to take the top off of a defense. This is why everyone loves Jameson Williams. Well we have maybe a 5% shot at Williams. If that's the case we can eliminate other guys who ran slower. Pickens doesn't fit then either with his 4.47 which is too "slow". Take Treylon Burks off the board with his 4.55. Danny Gray ran a 4.33 is that fast enough for people, Bo Melton ran a 4.34. People just want big name guys that they think are going to be legit # 1s. At best for the next couple of years, the WR we draft will be a # 3 guy. If we get a guy in the first round that's fine I understand, more weapons for Allen. I'm sayin there are other options in round 2 or round 3. A couple of years ago no one was talking about Gabriel Davis. He was thought of as ho hum whatever pick in another very deep draft where we traded it for Diggs.
There are tons of guys who are successful is rounds 3 and 4 and later that become big time WR's.
Adding a vertical element to the offense is certainly one approach, and yes, Jameson Williams fits that absolutely perfectly. There's also more of the alpha/bully/big-bodied WR, and I think Pickens fits that mold (to say nothing of his 4.47 being both not slow and ESPECIALLY not slow coming off a major injury). There's the YAC/get-the-ball-in-his-hands and let him make plays mold, that I think Wilson and Burks fit... There's a lot of routes you can go.
I don't say this to be dismissive of your points at all, but there's SOOO much more to it than the 40 time and there are reasons why Danny Gray and Bo Melton are being projected as 3rd and 4th round picks and why other guys are looking at going in the top half of the first. You act like wanting a "big name" is a bad thing -- I want those guys because they're fantastic football players. You're right that people slept on Davis, but he's also worked his butt off to become what looks like a mid-level WR2, and yes, with Diggs in tow, the rookie will probably be, at best WR2b, but that doesn't mean you can discount how they fit in or how you would want to use them.
The 2nd and 3rd round options you like are fine, I guess, I just don't think any of them are special and we're in a window where we should be looking for special. I think in that range, guys like Justyn Ross and Tolbert at least have a chance to be special (or dynamic in a way we don't already have). -
5 minutes ago, MrEpsYtown said:
I saw somewhere that we met with Rachaad White like 4 times and we could be looking at him in the middle rounds. He is a big dude. Runs 4.48, can catch and run it and has got pro coaching with Herm Edwards, Brian Billick, and Marvin Lewis.
Having met Marvin Lewis in person... that may not be a good thing
In all seriousness, I think people are overestimating the quality of play in the Pac12 over the past few years. It's one of the reasons I'm so down on the UW corners, and White didn't exactly tear up the conference to begin with...
-
Love:
- Trade up for Sauce or Jameson Williams in the first
- George Pickens in the 2nd or Jalen Tolbert/Justyn Ross in the 3rd
Expect:
- Andrew Booth Jr. @25
- Tariq Woolen in the 2nd (maybe slight trade up/separate from Booth pick)
Settle:
- Zion Johnson @25
- Trey McBride in the 2nd
-
2
-
11 minutes ago, cage said:
Bills will not be picking at #25. They're trading back and selecting Breece Hall w/ pick #3x (maybe #32 w/ Lions or early 2nd round)
If Hall is the guy, another trade that feels pretty reasonable/likely is trading down with the Giants for their 2 and Bradberry.
-
2 minutes ago, gonzo1105 said:
I just told you 3 really good players that could Kyle Phillips, Danny Gray, and David Bell. 3 guys you didn’t even mention in your initial convo with me. Okay so you hate Phillips, Calvin Austin etc because he’s a slot. Ok go look up Gray and Bell and tell me what you think. Both are outside guys. One a burner, the other a possession guy. Romeo Doubs(not a fan but a guy projected in the area), Bo Melton who is rising after the combine and had bad QB play his whole career
It's one thing to list "really good players" (debatable), it's another thing to identify a player that would fit what we're needing at WR... We already have 3 intermediate/separation types, so Phillips and Bell don't seem to make a ton of sense, at some point you can only have so many players running routes in the short/intermediate area. Gray is interesting, but to me, there's a sizeable gap in talent between him and the guys in the first 2 rounds.
I honestly think he, Doubs, Melton have had their stock inflated because there's so many good WRs at the top -- that gap in talent is pulling their stocks up. The guys I'd want if we're taking at WR in the 3rd would be Tolbert and Ross.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Warriorspikes51 said:
???Guy doesn't run routes. Seems like a strange fit for a team that clearly values separation...
-
Not a rumor, but I have to say... I usually have a pretty good feel for our direction by this time in the draft, I'm fairly flummoxed this year, which means Beane & co. have done a great job not tipping their hand (could also speak to the way the draft board breaks out...)
- We need a CB, but rarely draft directly for need, and everyone likely to be available at 25 has flaws. I find it somewhat interesting that Woolen isn't being connected to us at all (DISCLAIMER: I'm not saying I'd want him at 25). The Booth injury rumors are interesting as well, he's the 3rd best prospect in terms of makeup and tape, he feels like he should be our guy... is it possible we've successfully tanked his value with those rumors enough for him to fall to 25? The rumors certainly seem to suggest that...
- We're being HEAVILY connected to Breece Hall, and could certainly use a RB upgrade. Is that smoke to throw other teams off our real intentions? Or is that confidence from us that there's really no competition in the top 24 picks for him?
- WR is a weird position for us this year... It's not a massive need in the moment but could be quickly... Jameson Williams is the perfect fit for what we need but really unlikely to be reasonable for us to get to. London and Burks don't feel like great fits, unlikely Olave falls -- the one name that's not really been connected to us, despite having him in for a visit is Garrett Wilson, who seems like he'd probably be the second best fit behing JW... The Pickens rumors make me feel like they're being overblown by a team in the 2nd hoping he falls to them. Is that us? Beyond him, it doesn't feel likely that there will be a reasonable fit in the 2nd without moving up (there's a big gap after Watson and Skyy Moore and the next tier). With where we're drafting, assuming no movement around in the order, it kinda feels like we need to get our WR in the 1st or miss out on the top talent.
- Beane's comments about the board being done make me feel strongly that they're either VERY confident in getting the guy they want (makes me think Hall or Booth) OR prepared to go purely off value, which means all bets are off except for QB and Edge, potentially...
All that considered... I think I think the Hall stuff is smoke, ditto for the Elam stuff -- they're both just TOO strong, for what we usually have out there. I'll shoot my shot and say -- again, barring big moves up or down -- we're either selecting Booth or Wilson, but who the heck knows!
-
3
-
Elam or McDuffie
-
1
-
1
-
-
37 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:
I think some here under value Marquez Stevenson as a WR. He showed some good play last preseason toss in feel the WR depth in this draft is big similar to the year we got Gabe Davis in the 3rd. I don't see a stud WR putting us over the top this year. That's why am not advocating trading up for one.
Stevenson might end up being good, but if we feel like WR may be a need, a Super Bowl contending team CANNOT depend on a 6th round pick turning out. If he develops, depth is a great problem to have, but no, we can't just ignore a position because we might be underrating Marquez Stevenson.
-
2
-
-
16 minutes ago, BillsShredder83 said:
Very interesting! I can't see it, but if Buffalo felt confident enough to pull the trigger on it, I'd be pretty excited.
Huge if here... but IFFF Buffalo or some other team were to successfully roll this into multiple high picks in a year or two, it'd be very interesting to see it starts trend of sorts.
(Again no way I see it, but 3 days to kill. Interesting thought)
Oh yeah... with a SB window you'd have to just HATE the way the board fell out and not have any reasonable offers to do something like that. The fun part, though, is he's such a high ceiling guy that if we really could develop him with Josh keeping us in the hunt, that could yield a massive return. But again, you'd have to be crazy to do that lol
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:
As with every team who drafts at the bottom of the 1st, they have a group of players with 1st rd grades who they think could be there at 25 and they would take at 25. They have those ranked on their board. I wouldn’t be surprised if Breece hall is in that group of 5-7 players. I would be surprised if he’s ranked toward the top of that group. Is he in the mix if their top choices aren’t there? Sound possible given all the buzz. I don’t think it’s a revelation that they would like him. But I think he’s more in the mix for the Bills with a trade down or if he’s dropping in the 2nd. Of course if the guys they have ranked higher are all gone and they can’t trade down and feel there is a huge gap between him and the next RB they could just sit and take him
Agree with all of this. There's also a lot of "sub-questions" that play into this...
- who else is on that board that's still available?
- what is their positional value?
- what's the gap in value between those players (including Hall) and the next on our board at those positions?
- who's calling to move up and what are they offering?
- ...
-
2 minutes ago, HappyDays said:
Two years in a row we've been connected to a speedy RB at the end of the 1st round. It almost feels intentional. The Jameson Williams love I could believe more. Beane will not be shy about trading up for him if he thinks he's a superstar.
If we really want Breece Hall I hope we plan to trade down with Seattle first. I can't get excited about him as our 1st rounder.
Given the way the board breaks out for RB, WR and CB, I think a trade down to bump our 2 up earlier makes a ton of sense to get 2 viable players at those spots... I'm sure the professionals see that as well.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:
FWIW, Atlanta is split on the QBs. It was Corral for a while but now there are some differing options in that room.
I’ve also heard that the Bills love Jameson Williams and Breece Hall is a real possibility.
Wouldn't be shocked to see us trade our '23 1st in a move up to get Williams if he fell far enough.
Another interesting consideration... The Eagles are all but guaranteed to use another early pick on a WR and it sounds like that may make Jalen Raeger available. Now I am by no means suggesting that Raeger has star potential, I think that's proven itself out, BUT, he's still an intriguing WR based on analytics and if we're looking for somebody to take the top off of the defense, I could see him being a usable piece to run wind sprints for a late rd. pick or signing him post cut...
-
2
-
Can we get greedy?
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
I don't necessarily disagree, but I also think a year ago we probably wouldn't have included DE in a similar list and took Basham in the 2nd. Again, FAR from a lock, but I think there's enough reasons to justify it if that's the way they go...