glazeduck
-
Posts
984 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by glazeduck
-
-
7 minutes ago, BuffaloBaumer said:
I just think that if you are drafting a guy in the top 10 (especially receiver) he should not have as many question marks as Metcalf....
It's a fair concern, but as I've said on here a couple times, every pro comment of DK comes with the caveat that his health checks out. To have to acknowledge that in every post would be excruciating, so for the sake of discussion, just set that aside. If his health doesn't check out, then totally agree, he's off the board (or way way lower). Not to mention that if he has injury concerns, so do Marquise Brown and others.
After that, I don't really have any major question marks for him, aside from him simply not being the absolute perfect specimen for a WR. The agility stuff doesn't bother me, a semi-truck isn't going to be able to move like a motorcycle, it's just unrealistic to even expect that. I find it interesting that "not being 6'3 with crazy wingspan, huge hands, and otherworldly explosion/athleticism" isn't really a knock for the rest of the WR class, yet somehow less than-ideal agility is somehow the killshot for DK's future -- it all needs to be taken into context with everything else, and I see rare rare rare traits everywhere for him...
-
1 minute ago, Cornette's Commentary said:
SAVE US, DK METCALF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Boy, some of you guys are just fantastic at taking things out of context.
-
1 minute ago, BuffaloBaumer said:
Sooo, you are comparing him to mostly future Hall of Famers huh
Not at all. Just pointing out that just because we had a bad experience with drafting a WR in the top 10, doesn't automatically make it a death knell for that pick. There's been plenty of successful (and plenty of unsuccessful) WRs picked in the top 10.
-
6 minutes ago, glazeduck said:
I believe Saunders will be a very good pro, yep. There's also trading for Gerald McCoy.
There's also plenty of unsigned FAs: Suh, Jernigan, Liuget, Allen Bailey, Wilkerson, Bennie Logan, the list goes on...
Then there's the potential availability of DTs on teams who draft Quinnen, Oliver, Tillery, etc.
I also also also like both Phillipses to get more snaps this season, so I'm not exactly terrified about not currently having our 4th DT.
There's also nothing saying that we can't trade up from the second to get Christian Wilkins (meh) or Dexter Lawrence (me likey) as well...
1 minute ago, glazeduck said:There's also nothing saying that we can't trade up from the second to get Christian Wilkins (meh) or Dexter Lawrence (me likey) as well...
Hahahaha
-
Just now, Cornette's Commentary said:
So, what's your solution? Use a 2nd on Jerry Tillery, who did nothing of significance for Notre Dame last season? Use a 2nd on Jeffrey Simmons, who tore his ACL preparing for the Combine and will likely miss the entire season? Take Khalen Saunders, a DT who has NEVER consistently gone up against legitimate competition, in the 3rd?
I believe Saunders will be a very good pro, yep. There's also trading for Gerald McCoy.
There's also plenty of unsigned FAs: Suh, Jernigan, Liuget, Allen Bailey, Wilkerson, Bennie Logan, the list goes on...
Then there's the potential availability of DTs on teams who draft Quinnen, Oliver, Tillery, etc.
I also also also like both Phillipses to get more snaps this season, so I'm not exactly terrified about not currently having our 4th DT.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Cornette's Commentary said:
Are you super excited about the run defense going up against Le'Veon Bell (twice), Ezekiel Elliott, Phil Lindsay, Kenyan Drake (twice), Wendell Smallwood?
Wendell Smallwood?!?!?!?!?
@Cornette's Commentary, you do realize there are more ways to replace one defensive lineman than just our first round pick, right? I've seen you make this statement multiple times and it's beyond hyperbolic (and silly).
-
3
-
1
-
-
Interesting article...
Extremely well researched and detail-oriented, yet -- as others have said -- feels like they're trying to build evidence to one or two specific things and then, don't ever get there, use really inconsistent logic and provide a conclusion that feels almost entirely arbitrary -- as though the thousands of words spent in all of the analysis were completely wasted (spoiler: they were). It's funny to me, too that (unmentioned, literally anywhere) everyone just kind of assumes that Beane and McD will just follow their same trend every year and not eventually treat the draft like a poker game and go away from their trends.
What this all says to me is 2 main things:
1. Overall, we're in a great spot. We have minimal needs, lots of flexibility, lots of outs. We're seemingly talking to teams ahead and behind us, we're talking about trading for veteran players, etc.
2. As it relates to predicting specific players, really all we're left with is the larger data of who we've met with and worked out (quite a few names) and a sketch of roster strength and depth -- all of which has been talked ad nauseum -- biggest needs 3T, TE, alpha WR, DE, OT, youth at RB, etc.
-
16 minutes ago, BuffaloBaumer said:
At #9? Is that a joke? If they ever went after a receiver again in the top 10 with multiple question marks, it would have to lead to the firing of the GM within a year.
Mike Williams (LAC), Amari Cooper, Corey Davis (to a certain extent), Mike Evans, AJ Green, Julio Jones, Michael Crabtree, Calvin Johnson, Ted Ginn, Braylon Edwards...
It's almost as if drafting a wr in the top 10 isn't an automatic curse to said wr...
hmm...
-
1
-
-
Definitely provides options --
RB that you like falls to you in the draft? Cool
Get a good offer for Shady? Cool.
Stand pat with 2 historically proven guys and a younger buck who's shown decent production when given the chance? Cool
Anyone think a Shady/McCoy swap might make some sense now?
-
Just now, matter2003 said:
There is no reason to trade up to get a DT when they can select a very good to excellent one at 9 most likely
It's all cost-dependent, sure. But if the cost were palatable, Quinnen Williams is a superstar. He's head and shoulders better than the other "very good to excellent ones at 9".
-
1 hour ago, mrags said:
We are 100% agreeable with Oliver and where we see him. I think he’ll be a rotational guy imo.
I don’t disagree with your take on the WR position if you can get that guy. I just don’t know if I think Metcalf can be that. For one, he’s had multiple injuries that take away from him. A big fast, hard to cover guy could be any one of those guys I said. Except they all have better route running abilities. I don’t deny we need a big physical WR and I think Metcalf has that. I’d just rather sacrifice a little top end speed with a guy that’s more agile. Every one of those guys I said above has that and you won’t have to give up a mint for them. Maybe Harry and Brown in the first bit Butler, Hall and Harmon are all 2nd to 3rd rounders.
The agility metrics weren't great, no question, but the thing that always gets misunderstood is that agility only matters in the context of using it to excel in football -- it's one of a number of aspects, along with explosion, catch radius, speed, strength, bulk, demeanor, hand fighting, flexibility, body control, hand strength, intelligence, etc. to help a WR get open. DK has all of the rest in spades, so his agility -- especially when used correctly -- shouldn't be a major issue.
The injury thing is indefensible as none of us know how that checked out, so I think it goes without saying that any pro-Metcalf thought goes hand-in-hand with assuming he's healthy. Plus it's boring as hell to discuss...
-
1 hour ago, thunderingsquid said:
My bold prediction is that these will be our first four picks:
9 Brian Burns, EDGE Florida State
40 Dexter Lawrence, IDL Clemson
74 Kelvin Harmon, WR NC State
112 Darrell Henderson, RB Memphis
Buffalo will offer their 2nd round pick to GET OUT OF their Thanksgiving primetime game.
Lawrence will be gone before 40 (and doesn't really fit our need at 3T) and Harmon will be loooooong gone by 74.
I like your taste in players though! ?
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, mrags said:
I agree with your take on Oliver. There’s safer bets to be had for less at the position. However I feel the same way at WR. For every Tillery, Wilkins, Lawrence, Jones, Willis there is to Oliver. There’s a Harry, Butler, Brown, Hall, Harmon to Metcalf.
Agree to disagree on some things I guess.
If that’s why I say trade back and get one of the dominant TEs and pick up extra picks so that we can take the safer bets in rounds 2 and 3
To each their own, I think their position dictates a relative difference though...
A WR that's that big, fast and strong will always be a tough cover and can always be used effectively so long as he's healthy (that's always the caveat, but since we can't do anything about that I tend to leave out that bit) which is what I mean by "safeish". Maybe he doesn't become Calvin Johnson II, but if his floor is Tyrell Williams II, that's something. That, to me, makes the gamble of taking him worth it, whereas I see Ed Oliver's floor as being a commentator for Houston Cougars football in a few years ?
-
1
-
-
Quickly, here's my logic on not being a fan of Oliver...
I've said on multiple DK Metcalf threads that I want the Bills to take a homerun swing with their first pick, but that's oversimplifying it --- I want the Bills to take a "safeish" homerun swing. DK, in my opinion, is a guy with a very high floor and practically zero ceiling. To me, that's the type of guy I'm looking for given where this franchise is.
I recognize that Oliver has a high ceiling, and that he fits a need too, but a DT playing in the mid-260s, who's shown to maybe not quite be a consistent team player is a guy who has almost no floor, either. We can't afford to completely whiff on this pick. Another Aaron Maybin type pick could seriously derail the momentum we've started building.
THAT'S why I don't want Oliver, he's an undo risk when there are FAAAAR safer bets at his position who could be had quite a bit cheaper. (I also think that doing everything we can to make Josh Allen's life and development easier should be our absolute first priority, but I digress...)
-
2
-
-
Just now, mrags said:
Please god let this be true. I don’t want anything to do with Oliver anywhere near pick #9
I can't believe I agree with you on something!
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, inaugural balls said:
Just playin' you. I respect your opinion. Though I do like me some Oliver.
? all good here. Draft can't get here fast enough...
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, inaugural balls said:
I'm sure you mean well, but I gotta side with the experts on this one.
It's not meaning well, it's what I'm seeing with my own eyes. Experts are wrong constantly.
Again, I get that I'm in the minority here, that's fine.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, aristocrat said:
Pretty good sample
Donald is great, that doesn't mean the next guy who looks like him will be too.
Oliver's natural playing weight is going to be in the 270s, possibly even 260s. I'm not exaggerating when I say that he'll routinely be giving up 60-70 lbs on the guys across the LOS from him.
Count me out.
-
Just now, aristocrat said:
Just like Aaron Donald did?
Solid sample size of one there...
-
1 minute ago, Logic said:
I think he's more likely to HAVE a bust in Canton one day than to BE a bust, but time will tell...That's quite the prediction for a grossly undersized defensive lineman...
Dude's gonna get swallowed up in the NFL, just watch.
-
1
-
-
Nobody else here wants to believe me, but Oliver's gonna bust. This is the best thing that could possibly happen for us...
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:
He is a 4th round talent. If he goes in the 1st round I am giving up. I have been writing up my QB notes today (post to come tomorrow) and seriously.... he is so limited.
Big body, big arm. To some, that's all you need to see (not saying that's a good point, btw...)
-
2 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:
How do you propose they trade to 5 without giving up their 2nd round pick? I love Quennin, dont get me wrong, but I doubt we can get to 5 without including our 2nd rounder this year. That would be a big mistake to give up our 2nd.
Personally, I still think SF takes Quennin #2 overall. They have four first round DE's on the roster, including one they just gave up a 2nd round pick and a butt load of money for. Quennin does more for that Defense than Bosa IMO.
I believe Zay will be traded, not sure it will be on draft day. But I don't know how we can do all these trades you are suggesting. Now you are saying our 2nd rounder and Zay to get DK. I dont think we can do that and also trade for Quennin, which I believe would command this years 2nd.
Again, I'm not saying it's 100% realistic...
I do think NYG would be motivated to move back though, so our 3 and, say next year's 2 could possibly be enough...
-
6 minutes ago, Bill Murray said:
Also agree w @glazeduck, I think they have to come away w a RB, but I hope they go for it earlier in the 3rd or 4th.
I just don't think there's a ton of value at RB any earlier and would much rather fill needs at WR, TE, and DT.
To me, the difference between the top guys like Jacobs, Henderson, Harris, Sanders and Montgomery to day 3 guys like Holyfield and Ryquell Armstead is not significant at all, relative to the other spots we're needing to fill...
Who’s the ONE guy that you want in this draft?
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Quinnen or DK.
Safe is boring. Safe -- especially in a small market -- leads to first-round playoff losses.
Go big or go home.