DonInBuffalo

The Bills defense was much more effective a few years ago when Hargrove was healthy and not suspended. The 3rd DE needs to be an every down player, and having a 4th DE who is a situational pass rusher makes a HUGE difference. That's the role they (coaching staff) expects Maybin to fill this season. They might line him up at LDE, or they might line him up next to Schobel, to make double-teams more difficult. After he's had an entire offseason to put some bulk on his frame, maybe Maybin will be ready to compete for the LDE starting job next training camp.

I see people misusing statistics all the time, especially when it comes to sports statistics. Many people misuse statistics simply because they don't properly understand the most basic concepts. Probability theory is the branch of mathematics that deals with computing the likelihood of specific events occurring, given certain assumptions. One assumption is the selection method is Random, which means each event is equally likely to be selected. To apply probability theory to a real world situation, you need to build a mathematical model of that situation, and confirm that it properly applies. For example, if a die isn't "true", if some numbers are more likely to be rolled than others, then probability theory doesn't apply, because the selection method isn't random. Statistics studies historical information, and draws conclusions. That information can then be used to make future predictions. One common use of statistics is to determine if something is truly random. For example, a casino owner could use statistics to determine if a die was "loaded", by calculating the likelihood of a certain sequence of rolls occurring. This is sometimes referred to as a Confidence Interval. I wouldn't be surprised if casinos monitored results statistically, and use this technique to determine which tables to watch more closely, because of the likelihood of cheating. Another common use is to predict election results. As long as you are selecting a truly random sample of voters, you can make fairly accurate predictions with a sample sizes as small as 500 voters. Those would typically have an error margin of something like 3-4%. When building statistical models for sports, it's important to keep all of the basics in mind. Statistics works best for baseball, because you have large sample sizes and parts of the model come close to being random. There are 162 games in a season; players get as many as 500 plate appearances, see over 1000 pitches. Defenses are close enough to being equal that assuming they are equal doesn't throw your results significantly off. In baseball, there's one major battle going on (pitcher vs. batter) with a few variables that effect that. (score, inning, men on base...) Football is much more difficult because your sample sizes are so much smaller. On top of that, there are very few things that can be approximated to be random. BuffaloBill phrased that well in his post above. Because there are just so many factors that come into consideration on every play, it's very difficult to draw conclusions. People need to be careful to draw the distinction between what a statistic is actually saying, and what (appropriate) conclusions can be drawn from that statistic.

People need to recognize that the no huddle isn't any kind of "secret", or "surprise". It's just another tool in the offensive arsenal. The advantages of the no huddle are that the offense dictates the pace of play, and generally speaking the defense can't change personnel. The disadvantages of the no huddle are that the defense gets less time to rest, and generally speaking the offense doesn't change personnel, because then the defense would be allowed to as well. I'm a little foggy on the details since it's been so long, but a number of years ago the Bills had a playoff game against the Bengals. The Bengals had started using the no huddle not as a tool but more of a gimmic, where they would change personnel, and then quickly run up to the line of scrimmage and snap the ball while the defense was still changing, to either draw a penalty or force them to use a timeout. A few days before the game, the Bills filed some sort of appeal to a rules committee, and got a ruling clarifying that if the offense changes personnel, they have to give the defense adequate time to change as well, or it's a penalty on the offense. I have a very clear recollection of times the Bills ran the no huddle, seeing Kelly just standing in the shotgun, waiting for the defense to get lined up, before calling for the snap. That's because the Bills had substituted personnel, and per rule were required to give the defense the opportunity to do same. The other disadvantages of the no huddle are it greatly limits the number of formations and plays to choose from. Everything is shotgun, and the total number of plays to choose from are pretty limited. For example, in the Kelly era, they only had about 5 different running plays.

Seriously man, some of you folks might want to put down the crack pipe. I spent most of day 1 in a KFFL chat with people that follow football fairly closely, and are generally indifferent about the Bills. There was a whole lot of "huh?" and snickering going on with many of the Bills picks. These people were also critical of many other teams picks so take some of this with a grain of salt. Maybin looks like he may turn out to be worthy of where he was selected, eventually. But for now he's too undersized to play every down. The earliest we'll have any idea if he's capable of being a full time starter is the first preseason game 2010. Until then he's just a part time pass rusher, taking the roster spot of what's his name who got cut/suspended after getting in bar fight in Roch-cha-cha. Wood was a huge reach. Most people had him going mid-round. He's not the next Kent Hull. Based on what I read, he's very bright, and a very hard worker, but has at best average physical skills. Huge NTs will eat him for lunch, and just like most other Bills OL, he's not going to be generating any noticeable push forward in the run game. Has a tendency to get pushed backward (i.e. into the QB) in pass protection. Does this really sound like someone worthy of #28? Byrd was a big reach as well. He might turn out to be a decent cover-2 CB, but nothing more. The problem with someone like him is he's so slow you can't disguise your defensive scheme. If he's on the field, it's essentially a big flashing neon sign saying "WE'RE PLAYING COVER-2". Levitre was a good pick. Filled a huge need, and may compete for or win a starting job. Based on what I read, Nelson is undersized and has trouble carrying additional weight on his frame. He's a vertical threat, but he can't be counted on as an every down TE. More of a "tweener" who often lines up in the slot to avoid being jammed by a larger player on the LOS. Nic Harris is essentially the equivalent of Pierson Prioleau. Somebody who is or could be an outstanding ST player, but will probably never be a full time starter because he doesn't have a true position. Might excel in the "PP" role if the Bills changed their defensive scheme to something much more aggressive like "man boobs" ran when he was here. The final two picks were jokes simply because of the positions (CB) taken. Assuming the Bills sign all of their draft picks, they'll have 13 players (McGee, McKelvin, Youboty, Corner, Whitner, Simpson, Wendling, Wilson, Florence, Fox, Byrd, Harris, Lankster) competing for 9 or 10 spots. Hey "big Dick", when Marv said "you can never have too many CBs", that's not what he meant. The Bills will almost certainly be cutting players that will be scooped up by other teams. Now let's look the needs that weren't addressed, systematically going through it position by position: QB: not a position to be addressed in the draft. Older, not rookie would be what might help here. RB: we'll start opening day with 'shawn suspended, Jackson frustrated/alienated at best, Rhodes possibly if we're lucky better than a has-been, and a few unprovens. No need to address this position in the draft. FB: we have one (nobody) on the roster with nobody to compete for that spot. TE: arguably upgraded that position by adding another dimension, i.e vertical, but at least not for now anything else. WR: not addressed for good reason; already over-stocked. OT: who is the #4 OT? G/G: well addressed. DE: we added an undersized pass rushing specialist that maybe will develop eventually into an every down player. DT: not addressed. Apparently we're perfectly happy with our DT rotation, including the guy we tried to trade away but weren't able to because he flunked the other team's physical. LB: it might have been a good idea to draft somebody who could seriously compete for Ellison's starting job. DB: as usual, the big Dick focused on that in this draft. At least apparently someone restrained him to the point where he only reached for one of those on the first day picks in this draft.

You do realize that there's been a "rookie pool" as part of the CBA for years, right? There's a specified portion of the total salary cap that is allocated for all rookies. After the draft is complete, there's a formula that divides the pool among all 32 teams, based on how many picks they had, and how high/low they were.

I tend to agree. Those thinking the Bills will be taking a LT at 11 aren't looking at the big picture. If you look carefully at the OL currently under contract, the top 4 are starters at 4 of the spots, and Chambers/Bell are battling it out for the other OT spot, with the loser being the #3 OT. There's nobody else on the roster that isn't just UDFA fodder to take snaps in camp. They don't have anyone semi-legitimate to backup much less compete for C/G playing time. That is a critical need in this draft. IMO the ideal scenario in this draft for the Bills is pass-rushing DE at 11, Pettigrew at 28, and C/G in round 2.

A few scattered observations: Of course the Bills would like to trade down from #11 if they can find an agreeable partner, because they have more needs than they can fill with the picks they have. Assuming they can't trade down, Looking at it strictly from a business perspective, generally speaking the player's salary is "slotted" based on where he is selected. For example, there's a good chance #11 is going to get less than #10 but more than #12. So every time you "reach for need" you're by definition overpaying for someone. Also looking at it strictly from a business perspective, you're going to be paying that #11 as much or more than many of your starters. It doesn't make much sense to pay somebody that kind of money unless he's going to be on the field making plays for you right away. Ideally he'll be a starter on opening day, but at the very least contributing in some way. (the only exception I can think of is developing a young QB) Taking Jenkins doesn't make much sense; you would have problems just figuring out how to get him on the field, and you would be drafting at a position you don't really have a need.

http://www.draftcountdown.com/features/Value-Chart.php 3 = 2200 4 = 1800 11 = 1250 28 = 660 1910 total. We would need to throw more on the table to get #3 for that. We're only good enough to move up to #4 so far, unless for some reason KC really wanted to trade down.

In week 1, Walker played LT and Chambers played RT, because that's how they had been practicing. In weeks 2+, when Peters wasn't able to play an entire game, Chambers filled in for him because Walker was playing/practicing at RT those weeks. IMO you really need 7 solid OL to have a chance, typically the only 7 that would dress when everyone is healthy. In addition to the starters, you need a #3 OT who isn't going to embarrass you at either OT spot if he has to play on a moments notice, and you need an interior lineman who'll do the same. No matter what people were saying off the field about Bell, as of the end of last season Chambers was obviously ahead of him on the depth chart. So as of now, it should probably look like this: Chambers-McKinney-Hangartner-Butler-Walker Bell is the backup OT, and draft the backup C/G with #28. Of course, it's always good to have competition. It would nice if Bell performed well enough to compete with Chambers for that spot, or if the draft pick competed for one of the starting jobs.

I chose "last straw" because it was the closest fit to my opinion. If he continues to do seriously dumb things, he won't be in the NFL much longer. In case anyone has forgotten, Bruce Smith got a 4 game suspension relatively early in his career, and didn't have any other serious issues until the sleep apnia nonsense many years later.

If any player on any team who isn't performing at or near to Pro Bowl level doesn't understand he could be replaced at any time is a fool. Obviously the Bills front office was/is at least considering the possibility of Cutler, as by any objective standard he would likely be an upgrade over Edwards, sans the whining and other b.s. they would need to deal with.

First of all, even if there are no changes to the offensive scheme, TO helps because teams won't be able to defend the Bills the same ways they did last season. They won't be able to double Evans as much and they won't be able to put 8 in the box as often. Adding TO allows the Bills to line up Reed and Parrish more often as slot WRs. Neither of them really fits the prototype for "starting WR". TO is probably the best blocking WR on the roster now, which can't hurt the running game. He's a big target who will be on the field presumably almost every down on offense, which should help the move the chains. (unless he has problems with drops) As a previous poster mentioned, slants and YAC are both a trademark of Owens. (not literally, of course) All good coordinators adapt their schemes to the talent they have available. (I'm not necessarily saying that Schonert deserves to be put in the "good" category) In addition to a heavy dose of the previously mentioned slant routes, I expect we'll see a good dose of 4 WR sets, as putting Evans, Owens, Reed, Parrish, and Lynch on the field all at the same time could create all sorts of matchup problems for the defense.

Out of the players projected to be taken relatively early, here's my take:Orakpo will be gone at #11. Everette Brown looks like potentially a good fit. Tyson Jackson is actually too big; he's a better fit as a 3-4 DE than in the Bills scheme. Maybin and English are probably too small; better suited to be 3-4 OLBs.

Of course if Kyle Williams was taking about going up against Bell in practice, he must have been getting reps at G last season. Either that for for some odd reason Williams was getting reps at DE.

If the Bills sign June, Keiaho, or a similar caliber player, of course they won't take a LB with #11. You want that player to be competing for a starting job or at the very least substantial playing time. Actually, Denny makes quite a bit for an unproductive reserve DE. His cap hit for next season will be over $3 million. If the Bills take a DE with #11, that's a whole lot of money to be paying him, Kelsay, and Denney to be splitting time. They might be able to justify it if Schobel never returns to form, and sees relatively limited playing time.

Good article. One thing they'll hopefully be able to do is put in some sort of "88" audible. IOW, on pretty much any play where Evans and Owens are on opposite sides of the field, if Edwards sees 8 in the box he can quickly audible to send both WRs on go routes.

I was less than impressed with that article. Oman weighs almost 50 pounds more than Sproles. There really isn't anything "Sproles-ish" about him. He's comparing:- A traffic accident where someone received minor injuries - A non-violent gun possession misdemeanor - A disorderly conduct charge for someone who essentially just shouted some stupid things at the police - Someone pulling a gun to prevent a family quarrel from escalating into a full scale fight to "the Bengals path to self-destruction". Give me a break. If you took the best game just about any starting RB played last season you could pretty much make the same argument. Lynch's production has been marginal at best for where he was drafted. His obvious lack of maturity demonstrated by the repeated off-field incidents isn't exactly doing anything to improve his trade value. I will concede that Lynch's trade value is clearly much more than Jackson's. The reasons for bringing in veteran RBs are plainly obvious: 1) They don't have any on their roster. Ideally, you want all positions to have a mix of youth and veteran players. 2) Lynch's status is uncertain. Before today's plea deal, for all the front office knew, Lynch could have been spending a substantial portion of this season in prison. (and he's demonstrated that he's dumb enough there's a very real possibility of him doing something else really stupid that lands him in prison)

I've had season tickets since 1987. I used to have 4 seats, but had to cut back to 2 several years ago. Most recently I've been splitting the tickets with someone else, but of course they're still in my name. I told my friend that the only way I would keep the seats this year would be if he paid for them. (of course I'd still pay for the games I went to) I'm just fed up. Between: - no GM - marginal front office - mediocre coach - marginal coaching staff - Toronto - gate fiascoes last season there's probably more, but that's good enough. They've earned the right to no longer receive my money.

I have a somewhat different theory. I believe that Ralph is positioning the Bills so when he dies they're financially viable enough to be sold in a relatively short amount of time. Whoever buys the Bills will have to take on a substantial amount of debt. Financing that debt will probably cost in the rough neighborhood of $50 million per year. So unless the Bills have been making close to that during the recent times before his death, they could be a tough sell. If his family can't sell the team relatively quickly when he dies, one or more family members might have to declare bankruptcy just to pay the taxes. If they can sell the team relatively quickly, the taxes won't matter. Seriously, does it really matter if his family inherits "only" $200 million instead of $400 million?

http://www.nfl.com/combine/players?icampai...tainer-position All of those are presumably accurate measurements taken at the combine by NFL staff. Trust those numbers over anything you read anywhere else. FYI, on my computer(s) that page sometimes locks up on the default "By Name" tab. I discovered I could get around that by clicking on "By College" and then "By Position".

Many years ago, one of my managers at work taught me that from a business perspective, information is a resource. You don't just give it away for nothing. Every time the Bills cut a player such as Royal or McCargo, they are giving away information to other teams. They then all know that the Bills will need to sign another TE or DT to fill that spot.

To clarify, I was saying that they didn't have enough evidence to charge him with a crime. The only evidence they had, which you summarized well, was only sufficient to charge him with a traffic violation, which technically isn't considered a "crime". Let's take this from the top: - The police saw the car had some sort of problem with the license plates. That gives them sufficient cause to investigate further. If the car had been moving, they would have been justified in turning on their lights/siren and pulling the car over. - The marijuana had to be mentioned in the police report, because that's what gave them probable cause to search the car. Otherwise, the whole case would have been tossed out already. - It isn't a crime to smoke marijuana. It's a crime (or in some cases a violation) to possess it, and of course it's a crime to sell it. There was no specific evidence as to which of the three people in the car were/weren't smoking; just speculation. Testing the blunts, or even dusting them for prints, would accomplish nothing. You still wouldn't have proof beyond a reasonable doubt as to who was smoking. Urine tests wouldn't legally prove anything because it's not illegal to smoke. You still wouldn't have proof beyond a reasonable doubt that anyone possessed the pot. For example, they could all simply claim that they apparently ate some brownies and didn't know that they had pot in them. Of course, anyone with even a modest amount of common sense recognizes that it's 99.9% likely that all three of them were smoking. But that's not the point. The point is there isn't enough admissible legal evidence to charge any of them with drug possession.

Lack of evidence. If they had an actual case they would have charged him. Regardless of what you wish, LA cops and lap testers have lots of better things to do with their time and money other than trying to prove that someone is guilty of an extremely minor drug violation. Of course there's no legal basis to require Lynch to submit to a urine test.

They're probably only charging him with misdemeanors because there was no violence or criminal intent involved. (other than the smoking) When I googled to find out some more about California gun laws, I found an attorney's web site that said if the gun is in the trunk of your car they can't charge you. The gun has to be "readily available". I haven't read anything that definitively said where the gun was. It really doesn't make any sense for the gun to be in the trunk if it belonged to Lynch. Doesn't do him much good there if he has to deal with trouble on relatively short notice. I'm guessing one of the other passengers in the car had the gun on his person. The officers "determined" the gun was Lynch's because Lynch told them it was his gun. Lynch might be stupid, but he's not a scumbag. He wouldn't throw one of his friends under the bus for something that was his fault.

The thing is, all tagging Greer does is give him and teams wanting to trade for him more leverage. It actually hurts the Bills. Teams would know that the Bills wouldn't want to keep Greer at that price, so they would offer lowball deals. If Greer was tagged, he would ask for more in a long term deal than he would if he was an UFA, for the same reason.