ndirish1978
-
Posts
8,252 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by ndirish1978
-
-
So...yeah this thread exists
-
Bleacher Report is terrible. That said, I think he's top 5
-
You want to know why he's not suited to the grind of playing against fast edge rushers? Watch his combine workout and look at the difference between his body type and fluidity compared to Kalil. Kalil is a plug and play starter at LT. Reiff is a tough guy who plays with good leverage, but is much more suited to playing RT, a' la Bulaga. LTs need to have quicker feet than he does.
-
If he fell past 4-5 teams would be outbidding each other to get him
-
+1 to missing Tim Graham. He's not even a Bills fan and he still writes better stuff than this hack
-
I would watch that.
I would pay a nickel to watch you watching that
-
It would help if I could get that without getting ripped off for it. I refuse to sign up for what amounts to ESPN Better.
There's no way that some objective, prepared tool doesn't exist for GMs to rapidly evaluate draft day trades. If for no other reason than to cut through the crap and stay on the critical decision points. Every NFL team, except the Redskins, plans and prepares for 12 hours a day, for months, in the off-season. Coaches spend hours and hours just making sure they get 5 minutes of practice right.
But, only on draft day, we are supposed to believe that everybody just wings it? No way in hell.
Whatever they use may not be in the exact form of this chart, but, there's no way in hell they just do it based on whatever comes to mind....unless it's the Redskins. Nobody in the war room is going to remember every player on the board and how a trade might affect who they get where. There has to be some sort of pre-planned thingamabob, or excel spreadsheet, or even a real software program, that assists with this.
I have....the Redskins....which is the real world application of your theory here.....and is therefore, hysterical.
Why do I need to go through a logical proof....when all I need say is "The Redskins"?
I bet you think the pattern of their behavior over the last 10 years....should be ignored....because you think RG3 is a good player.
And you want to talk in terms of logic? How about statistics? As in: what % of the Redskins moves....just at the QB position...over the last 10 years...have worked, or weren't horribly conceived and executed? Logic? 1. You have now confused me with another poster.
2. Nothing I have said here has been refuted by anyone, and that status will not change, because it is indeed based on unassailable logic, and given your skills on display here, even if it wasn't, it's doubtful you could do anything with it.
3. Time for you to go back and re-read the thread. Reading comprehension is important.
Well... s(*t!
You mean to tell me I worked up a head of steam over nothing? How unlike me 
-
We get him via the draft, or a free agent contract in about 4 years.
-
Noobs are ruining this thread. Missed you Spags. You get that ghost problem under control? If not, Tebow should be able to take care of that for you. Congrats on landing the NFL's most famous player. Now tell me how he's going to coexist with Sanchez. Answer my questions and show some respect, or you might find yourself AWOL...and I'm not leaving no breadcrumbs.
-
Because of 1 &2 this is literally the WORST list of people you could possibly put together. A right tackle and a nutcase with terrible speed. NFL network stated the guy's pro day took him from maybe a second rounder to maybe not getting drafted.
-
Reiff is an RT not going to be an LT...someone mentioned that he is another Bulaga and he is. We passed on Bulaga we will pass on this guy too...
If Karl Malone's bastard son would just resign life would be easier this draft
I know you don't care, but I found that statement offensive. Just fyi
-
I ask for objectivity, and evidence of what GM no longer uses draft charts to evaluate draft trades, especially during their 15 minutes on the clock....
....and you give us....the F'ing Redskins.
Thanks for making my point for me. And, then you proceed to do it again.
If picks have more value...why is a draft chart...less useful...to the point of being meaningless? Your arguments lack substance and any discernible logic. The poster stated that your use of the draft value chart was incorrect, because you were attempting to calculate our pick at 10 and assign its value to other team's picks in the same and later rounds. They were correct in that teams no longer say "well you have pick x and that's worth 10000 points, so we have to give you approximately 10k points to make a trade. Having been refuted, you then changed your argument and began saying the value chart is a jumping off point and that we could ask for more. That's not what you said originally and it's a weak way to try to not admit your statement was inaccurate. I could respect if you said "well if anything, the chart being gone helps us", but you didn't you tried to show how your original incorrect statement was even more valid. Just concede the point and move on.
-
I'm not trying to be a prick, but there is another thread that's a few pages long on this topic. I'd recommend reading it because I thought the discussion was pretty good. In short, nothing stops us. His measurables allow him to play sam or mike in a 4-3.
-
What part of "we're not big players in free agency, we prefer to build through the draft" did Nix not understand this offseason? It's a more aggressive approach this year and we should not rule out a more aggressive draft strategy, such as trading up.
If you're going to post things in an open forum and quote someone, it would at least be intelligent to listen to all his interviews. They quoted that to him verbatim at the last presser and he said "the reason we're going into free agency now is because there were guys that we like that are out there. There's been some guys that didn't fit that were out there...older guys, but that's not the market we're in."
http://www.buffalobills.com/media-center/videos/#?id=7d6939e3-9ebf-40be-9066-c00c3be48543
Here, please scroll to 2:03. Or, how about this
http://www.buffalobills.com/media-center/videos/#?id=1767124a-d9da-425e-a590-cf44c13d7125
1:42
You guys never listen or you don't believe what we say anyway. We've always said if there is a guy there that will make a difference, we'll be aggressive and go after the guy
Now please tell me how his words coming out of his mouth are not what he means.
-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would only trade down if I could get this scenario:
I would contact the agent for Pitt Steeler free agent reciever Mike Wallace. I would see if he would sign a contract that the Bills could afford. If he doesn't want crazy money and could be signed, I would look for a trading partner. If there was any way to trade down to the bottom of the first round and gain another 2nd round pick I would do it. Then I would give up that low 1st round choice as the compensation for signing restricted free agent Wallace. The key would be if Wallace would sign a reasonable contract that the Bills could afford. You would have Wallace and two 2nd round picks. Besides, Wallace is probably better than any reciever in the draft that would still be there at number 10.
He's asking for more money than Larry Fitzgerald, which is why the Niners dropped trying to get him.
Yeah? What has replaced it? Which GM said that?
Once in a while I see this stated here and elsewhere, but I never see who said it, why, when, where, and what it's being replaced with as the standard tool for evaluating drafts. Instead, this random statement seems to exist only so that unrealistic Madden-like trade up/down scenarios can escape being held to a standard, and therefore escape being ridiculed.
Without the draft chart....the "we could have traded up/down" clowns get to posit whatever ridiculous trade they want, claim it was there, based on some random tweet/rumor, and then we get to hear how they are smart, and the FO is dumb, and we missed out on a trade we should have made, because we didn't submit to their "genius".
It'd be awfully convenient for these people if the draft chart was old and meant nothing. But without any support for this, all this sounds like is people trying to get out of having to defend their Madden-based, dopey trade scenarios.
I refuse to believe that there is no objective tool for being able to quickly evaluate a trade, during the draft itself. 15 minutes and 3-4 teams calling with offers...is not the time to be winging it. I also refuse to believe that all trades are evaluated subjectively, "cause the GM can just do it".
None of that makes any sense whatsoever. Now given that....what do you know about the Draft Chart going away?
Watch NFL Network at any given time for more than 5 minutes and you can hear it from Casserly or Lombardi. That chart meant less and less for years and it is completely worthless now.
-
Kuechly has excellent coverage skills. Move him or Shep to SAM and we have a decent set of LBs. I love Barnett and I think Shep will turn into a solid player, but I don't think he's the anchor of our linebacking corps.
-
Fletcher Cox is not elite
-
This is the scenario that nets us LT Mike Adams and OLB Zach Brown in RD1, and your choice in RD2:
Vinny Curry DE43 Marshall
Lavonte David OLB43 Nebraska
Stephon Gilmore CB South Carolina
Coby Fleener TE Stanford
I've seen 3 mocks with Gilmore going in the first. I'm happy with the 1st round. but I suspect if we went with Adams, would would use the 2nd first rd pick on Gilmore. Buddy said he wants to add 2 CBs and our starters are old.
-
I know this is about as far fetched as any predictions this time of year, but what if Buffalo is planning on trying to trade up?
I see 3 distinct possibilities:
1. Buffalo has their sights on a player at 10 - someone they believe strongly in being well worth the pick - a probowl type player, and as we all know from experience, it might not be someone we or the pundits believe is a fit at the 10 spot.
2. Buffalo just goes BPA. Whichever falls to them they take. That might be their philosophy since they are not as weak as they were a few months ago. BPA would ensure a value at 10 without losing that pick on a reach.
3. Buffalo has talked a lot in this past week about now being freed up in the draft. What if the Bills are looking at this draft as we are - that there just aren't that many superstar talents in it; the really talented players will be gone by pick 7 or 8. If they are thinking this - that the positions they'd like to really improve at - CB, QB, LT are all positions where there are players in the draft who could fill the need, but will be gone by 10, AND they are ready to start trying to win NOW - then maybe they see themselves as not having as many holes now, and would be willing to trade up 4 or 5 spots to land a player that will be an impact player for them for years, and who will remove another need.
Looking at the roster, the Bills have enough depth on the O-line to start the year, with the exception, IMO, of having a sure-thing LT (Hairston could pan out, but we'll see how much faith they have in him) and a backup C. Recievers - if Easley comes back healthy, we're actually able to go into the season with what we have. I think we could use a sure-thing WR, too, and a backup QB. But, and here is my reasoning - barring injury, we add a truly pro level LT by trading up, and our O-line is now very, very good. We could be a run first team, setting up the pass, and our offense could be top 12, if everyone stays pretty healthy.
Defensively, again, if everyone stays healthy, a shutdown corner to go with who we already have, and our D-line - and our defense might be good enough to win us a playoff spot.
So - if they are really wanting to leave this draft with a position of need settled, then trading up might be worth it, as we don't have as many needs all around. We have a roster full of mid-round guys who have potential, so adding more of those types might not get us over the hump...
Then again, the Bills might just see enough talent in this draft to get starters out of the first few rounds without trades - and I hope that is true!
Buddy has repeatedly stated that his philosophy is not to trade up. That if anything he would prefer to trade down but most likely stay pat with his picks. Why do people hear this, then come up with a series of rationalizations for why he should do what they want him to do?
-
I want no part of that show. It's cursed like Madden
-
Another terrible thread. What part of "we are not in the business of trading up" did you not understand when Buddy said it years and and then proceeded to repeat every time asked about it.
-
I want Bell back and I want to take the rest of our $ to re-sign Freddy, Byrd and Levitre
-
They just posted the videos of NFLN's coverage in their media section. The website has gone downhill as of late. Poor coverage and much less content than they should have. I get more information from this website than BB.com
-
I just read the whole thread and there was SO MUCH LESS vitriol towards him than I would have seen on this board. Most of the people there said something along the lines of "it's more money than they should have paid for him, but at least it's the Bills and not the other 2 teams in the division."
My favorite quote from that thread:
"The Bills have Mario Williams, Marcell Dareus, Kyle Williams and Mark Anderson on their D-line...
And yet I am still more terrified of Aaron Schobel, by himself."
All this talk about Floyd being #2 to Stevie.
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Floyd makes the team better. I don't care what you call him.
2 of the instances occurred when he was at home, not Notre Dame. But ND is notorious for heavy drinking. It's in the middle of nowhere and the club scene is not great, so there are a TON of house parties. I should know, I threw enough of them.