Dr. Who

Jackson is already gone. I think this does show that the notion that it's a deep draft at DT, so take a CB early is not as obvious a gambit as many assume. What an uninspiring mix of alternatives.

I wasn't planning on back-to-back DT, but then Williams kept sliding, and there he was sitting there at 56, and I thought, what the hell, let's be really good in the middle of the DL. 30. Derrick HarmonDT Oregon 56. Tyleik WilliamsDT Ohio State 62. Darien PorterCB Iowa State 109. Dont'e ThorntonWR Tennessee 132. Sai'vion JonesEDGE LSU 169. Clay WebbOG Jacksonville State 170. Kitan CrawfordS Nevada 173. Mitchell EvansTE Notre Dame 177. Zah FrazierCB UTSA 206. Shaun DolacLB Buffalo

I agree with this. Really, it's going to come down to individual evaluations and who falls within range, and there's no way to anticipate that with much accuracy. I can think of 3 or 4 players that might fall that would tempt me. I think Beane should be prepared to make a big move if something develops. If it doesn't, the strength of the draft is as you say. Either move up for a player you think can be elite, or, if anything, you'd like to find a way to maybe add a third rounder and have four picks in the first two days. I would consider moving up for Grant, who I like a lot, and for Barron. I personally really like Starks, even though I suppose folks would lose their minds if we took a safety in the first. And some folks have mentioned Golden. The only WR I would trade up for would be McMillan if he unaccountably fell within range, though if we end up going some combination of CB and DT early, I think Beane should add at WR either with the remaining second rounder, or a third rounder that he'd have to finagle. Kyle Williams would be my target. I don't think he makes it to day 3.

36. Kenneth GrantDT Michigan 56. Trey AmosCB Ole Miss 62. Princely UmanmielenEDGE Ole Miss 70. Kyle WilliamsWR Washington State 109. Billy BowmanS Oklahoma 169. Marcus TateOG Clemson 170. Mitchell EvansTE Notre Dame 173. Nohl WilliamsCB California 177. Raheim SandersRB South Carolina 206. Tyrion Ingram-DawkinsDT Georgia

Kyle Williams is the fella. He's going day 2, though.

I don't know, really. I wouldn't conclude that, however, simply on the basis of past bitterness. A lot of time has gone by, and he's an aging vet trying to catch on. The Bills offer a chance to play for a team with genuine SB aspirations.

I think I'd rather try for Gilmore if you're going that route.

Grant was selected 20th by the Broncos in this mock. I'm not happy about it, either.

It was done in the era before hyper-specialization. Go look up Bronko Nagurksi, for instance.

Right, that's why I said "no kidding." I understand the frustration. I just happen to have my favorites. I like Grant at DT, Barron, Amos, and Revel at CB. Maybe can get one of them.

I'd forgive Beane some of his baffling moves at the position if he made it happen.

I think he goes day 2. It would be nice if we had a 3rd round pick.

Yes, I understand that reasoning. If you don't think the DT at #30 is special, you make that judgment. And then it depends on whose your last CB that could start. I'm not certain there's no one there at 56. Also, I don't like the desperation about CB. Beane has screwed up if he has forced his hand into having to secure one at #30. Paradoxically, perhaps, I wouldn't blame him if he made a small trade up for Barron if he fell close enough to grab.

Well, I disagree with the notion that Coleman and Palmer are adequate answers for the outside WR. I'd much rather go after a boundary receiver. I'm not sure that player is in the draft. I would spend a lottery ticket on Thornton with a day 3 pick, i guess. I think someone is going to take him earlier, and I wouldn't gamble that much on him. Noel is one of the players I like, however. If they take WR day 2, he ought to be a consideration.

No kidding. The folks who want to go CB at #30 emphasize the massive need at the position, and the relatively limited draft depth in comparison to DL (stipulating that is the likely alternative in the first.) For those who think the need is dire, there isn't any room for prudential calculation. Myself, I believe if there is a fella who can genuinely stop the run and provide pass rush up the middle, you take that guy, because that kind of pressure helps the entire secondary. Is Grant or Harmon that player? Well, I like Grant, and I'd be very tempted to take him. All that said, I think Amos and Revel are a step ahead of the likely alternatives with a chance to be there at #30. Would you rather bank one of them, and then "settle" for a Collins or a Farmer, who they seem to like, day 2? Maybe, but I'm not ready to just concede CB at #30.

I'm not convinced he's another DK Metcalf. He's going to get overdrafted now, I think. Afraid I don't much like this draft for WR. I wouldn't take Thornton that high.

You should take a look at Desnoyers. I'd add him to the list if we're picking in the 5 to 7 range.

From what I have read, and the opinions of some other folk who seem generally informed, I don't think Martone is really Tkachuk, but he's maybe Tuch. I'm curious about McQueen. Ideally, of course, you end up with Misa.

I suppose I think he can provide some interior pass rush, as SoonerBillsFan suggests. And then you would pay him. But if I'm wrong on that, my fall back plan is to go after Collins in the second. Beane either goes CB or Edge most likely at #30 then, though I'm not sure I like any of the DE there unless someone unexpected falls.

I understand. I just really like Grant.

I don't think that's a position you pay big FA dollars to, and it's a deep position in the draft. However, I would entertain taking one at #30, which would disappoint those who believe it is not a premium position worthy of a first rounder. I am not opposed to retaining our good players, though I think Bernard was an overpay, and I'm ambivalent about Groot. Where I dissent from Beane's choices is that I personally think Metcalf is a perfect plus player for the team. I would have paid the draft price to acquire him, and I also believe that he could have been fit reasonably in the cap. That is the kind of adjustment Philly makes on the regular. I was onboard with a bigger draft and cap expenditure for Garrett, but he wasn't really available. And then, the real gap in the FA spending is CB. If that means Beane feels compelled to fill that need in the first (it might be value there, it might not), that is where I foresee further disagreement. If Grant is there at #30, I prefer him to some of the supposed upper tier CBs, for instance.

Let's remember the context of this discussion based on the OP: it was the question of whether it matters how one scores, if one happens to be a top 3 scoring team. There is a presupposition built into that question, which pertains to the crowd that believes that all the handwringing over WR1 or the talent surrounding Josh Allen, however one wishes to phrase it, is misplaced, with the frequent, but not uniform corollary that we ought to just focus on the defense. So, there is a kind of implied conversation in the question. There is a reshifting away from that when it becomes a narrower conversation about specific aspects of whether or not players should have made plays in Buffalo playoff games. And yet, I think that does implicitly redound to the question of quality, and obviously FireChans and I agree on the basic point about roster building and doing what one can in terms of how best to increase one's chances of success.

Zebras always seem to be force for evil, or at least one-sided judgment. Luck is something one can hardly prepare for, but having superlative players is at least a partial counter, because elite players have greater capacity to respond to those moments where a clutch play is needed. I don't think this is much beyond common sense, but if you think it is a bad take, have at it.

My current, but still changeable view on WR is that I'd take Bond in the second for the speed, even though he's obviously not a perfect boundary receiver. And I've been convinced that Kyle Williams might be worth a shot later. It doesn't seem to me that the fella we would want is necessarily in this draft; maybe Golden, but I wouldn't trade up to get him. I was keen on Jayden Higgins for a while, but I doubt he has explosive play ability, though he's more athletic than some give him credit for.

Somewhere in one of these threads @LEBills has a pretty devastating analysis of Williams. He's a definite "no" for me.