Orton's Arm

It's an argument that's relevant to what's being said about drafting a CB. Many people here are in favor of using a first round pick on a CB, on the theory that you're getting much more bang for your buck this way than would have been the case had you tried to acquire similar CB talent in free agency. But as Tipster pointed out, the same is also true at DE. The difference between the two positions is that the first round CB will be gone after his first contract is over, while the DE might well be signed to an extension.

If the Vikings are looking for a QB, I know where they can get a 5th year vet, with an impressive array of physical tools, an excellent deep ball, a strong commitment, solid mobility, and one of the better QB ratings from the 2006 season. I imagine that this wonderful player (plus a third round pick) could be had in exchange for their second round pick. Okay, so I don't really expect the Vikings to fall for the above paragraph. But it would be nice if they did: the Bills could use an extra pick in the second round.

For comparison, I looked up the stats for Eric Moulds; who is currently 34 years old (Chad Johnson is 30). Over the last four years, Moulds has put up the following totals for receiving yards: 1043, 816, 557, 342. Chad Johnson would provide an immediate impact at the WR position, but how many years would his production last? The Bills ran into a similar problem several years ago, when they traded away a first round pick for a 9 year veteran at QB. Just two years later, they used another first round pick to try to find that quarterback's replacement. If the Bills use a first round pick on a given position, that position ought to be solidly filled for many years to come. That won't happen if we trade away a first round pick for Chad Johnson.

W Sept. 7 Seattle Seahawks 1 p.m. L Sept. 14 at Jacksonville Jaguars 1 p.m. W Sept. 21 Oakland Raiders 1 p.m. W Sept. 28 at St. Louis Rams 4:05 p.m. L Oct. 5 at Arizona Cardinals 4:15 p.m. Oct. 12 Bye L Oct. 19 San Diego Chargers 1 p.m. W Oct. 26 at Miami Dolphins 1 p.m. W Nov. 2 New York Jets 1 p.m. L Nov. 9 at New England Patriots* 1 p.m. L Nov. 17 (Mon.) Cleveland Browns 8:30 p.m. W Nov. 23 at Kansas City Chiefs 1 p.m. W Nov. 30 San Francisco 49ers 1 p.m. W Dec. 7 Miami Dolphins (at Toronto) 4:05 p.m. W Dec. 14 at New York Jets 1 p.m. W Dec. 21 at Denver Broncos 4:05 p.m. L Dec. 28 New England Patriots* 1 p.m.

Maybe he'd sell the team to Jim Kelly and that ownership group he's been trying to put together. The conversations between Ralph and Jim would go something like this. Ralph, "Malcolm Kelly had a good game this past Sunday." Jim, "Yup. You can't go wrong with a guy named Kelly." Ralph, "You know what? You're right. I have a good feeling about your ownership group, and I'm willing to shave $10 million off the price I'd mentioned the last time we talked." Jim, "That's mighty generous of you, Ralph." One week later . . . Ralph, "If Malcolm Kelly hadn't dropped that pass at the end of the game, we would have beaten the Patriots." Jim, "Ever since the Bills stopped going to the playoffs, I've always thought of the Patriots games as this team's Super Bowl. This one was a heart breaker." Ralph, "Yeah. And it brings back memories of some other guy named Kelly coming up short in other Super Bowls." Jim, "Let's not go there." Ralph, "I'm afraid that $10 million price reduction we talked about isn't going to happen."

Thank you! First and second round picks should be used to build the core of your team--used to find players who will give you solid play for many years to come. Every high draft pick you use on a "first contract and out" type of player is one less pick that's available for building the core of your team.

Belichick has said that he learned from his mistakes in Cleveland; causing him to do things differently in New England.

Thanks for doing all this work. One of the things that jumped out at me was that Super Bowl teams devoted 8% of their resources to RBs, while the Bills devoted a whopping 20%. A running back is typically able to make an immediate impact. However, a RB's career is typically shorter than most other positions. During his stay in Buffalo, TD used two picks in the first two rounds on running backs: Travis Henry in the 2nd, and Willis McGahee in the first. In that same span, he used just one pick in the first two rounds on the offensive line. I don't mind TD's decision to invest draft picks in the WR position. The Colts, for example, used first round picks on Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne. Guys like Michael Irvin and Jerry Rice were chosen in the first round. There's nothing wrong with using a first round pick on your #1 or #2 WR. TD's problem was that he repeatedly used 2nd round picks on undersized slot receivers, while neglecting the offensive line. The whole point of using a first or second round pick on a position should be to fill that position, for many years to come. Often, that's not what happened with TD. He began his tenure in Buffalo by using a first round pick on Nate Clements (as opposed to giving Antoine Winfield an extension). His 2nd round pick that year was on a RB that was our starter for around, ahem, 3.5 years, before being traded away. His third round pick was used on another "first contract and out" player--this one at LT. After Clements' contract had expired, the only player we had left from that draft was Aaron Schobel. In 2002, TD again demonstrated his penchant for quick fixes, by trading away a first round pick for someone else's aging veteran QB. 2003 was the second time in three years that TD used a high draft pick on a RB. Over a three year span, TD used two first round picks on a QB--once in 2002, and again in 2004. If you want to be in the Colts/Chargers/Patriots/Jaguars category of teams, you need a solid core of players--guys whom you can count on to give you a high level of play for many years to come. TD failed in Buffalo because he failed to build such a core. There were two reasons for this failure: the shortsightedness I've already touched upon, and the fact that he often seemed to value athleticism and measurables more than intangibles.

I came across an interesting datum: "Belichick has NEVER used anything higher than a third-round pick on a cornerback." Other than his three Super Bowl rings, Belichick doesn't have much to show for his strategy of taking linemen early, and cornerbacks late.

There's a difference between depth on the DL, and depth at, say, OL. With the way the Bills rotate their defensive linemen throughout the game, your starters and backups will each see a lot of snaps. But your backup center probably won't see the field unless the starter goes down. If both your LDEs are on the field for a roughly equal number of snaps, does it really matter a whole lot which one has the "starter" label? The Bucs won the Super Bowl based primarily on their defense; and Simeon Rice played a very important role in that defense. The Colts won the Super Bowl because they finally got their act together on defense. Dwight Freeney's play was a big part of the Colts' ultimate defensive success. The Bills should be (and probably are) open to the idea of using an early pick to add a similar player. Conversely, the Bills have a track record of not giving extensions to their first round CBs. Using a first round pick on a guy, at any position, who's expected to be a "first contract and out" type guy is a luxury this team can't afford. Taking a CB in the second round--as you suggest--makes more sense. I'll agree with you that CB is a need. But is it really a bigger need than TE, C, or #2 WR--three positions at which the Bills lack a starting-caliber player?

That's funny. I agree that Byrne is at the bottom of the totem pole amongst sports writers. But even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then; which is exactly what Byrne did with his article. He asserts that we have more pressing needs than CB: at the WR position, at the C position, and at DE. I'd have a very hard time arguing with that. The Bills desperately need a WR to start opposite Evans, they don't have a center, and last season, the front four did little to put pressure on opposing QBs. The cover 2 is heavily reliant on getting good pressure from the front four; so an upgrade at LDE would go a long way to making this defense better. If anything, I was a little surprised Byrne listed CB as a bigger need than TE. Jabari Greer is better at CB than Robert Royal is at TE.

He has cornerback as our fourth-most glaring need:

The highest ranked CB in the draft--Leodis McKelvin--almost certainly won't be there when the Bills pick at #11. That leaves Dominique Rogers Cromartie as the most likely choice should the Bills decide to take a CB at #11. (Most mock drafts seem to have him going second among CBs taken.) There are several problems associated with this guy. Pro Football Weekly has him rated as the 18th or 19th best football player available, so the Bills would maybe have to reach a little to grab him. Then there's the fact that, other than the Senior Bowl, he didn't play at a high level while in college. He doesn't like to tackle, and he only has one kidney. The only reasons people are talking about him as a first round pick are his excellent combine, his senior bowl performance, and the fact he's the cousin of the Cromartie you mentioned. An NFL talent evaluator described him as a "bust waiting to happen." In the unlikely event Cromartie lived up to expectations, it's reasonable to assume he'd leave the Bills after his first contract was over. If the Bills didn't extend Nate Clements, Antoine Winfield, Thomas Smith, or their other successful first round CBs, why would they extend Cromartie should he prove successful? I oppose the Bills taking a first round CB in general (he'll be a first contract and out kind of player) and Dominique Rogers Cromartie in particular. If the Bills decide to take a defensive player with their first pick, it should be on a defensive lineman. Last season, Kelsay and Denney combined for a grand total of, ahem, 3.5 sacks. There's obvious room for improvement there. Sacks alone don't tell the whole story of the pass rush's accomplishments. Sometimes, pressure on the QB can force him into an errant throw, resulting in an incompletion or an interception. If your front four can force Brady to throw the ball after 2.5 seconds, it will make things a lot easier for your back seven. If Brady has five seconds to throw, he will pick your defense apart, no matter who you have playing secondary. Bill Walsh once said that the key to winning football games is a good pass rush in the fourth quarter. Everyone remembers the Super Bowl when Joe Montana threw the last minute touchdown pass to John Taylor, to beat the Bengals. But the only reason Joe Montana and the offense were able to take the field for that last drive was because the Bengals offense had gone three and out. The 49ers defensive line was talented and deep; and that DL's play on that last Bengals' drive was the primary reason why the Bengals were forced into a 3 and out. But you don't need to look that far back into the past to find an example of a Super Bowl being heavily influenced by the defensive line. In the Giants/Patriots Super Bowl, Brady never seemed to have adequate time to throw. He finished the day with significantly worse stats Eli Manning's.

The thing that struck me about the article was its description of Devin Thomas: I'd much rather the Bills take a guy like Sweed (good character, good work ethic, 6'4", good hands, plenty of college experience) than Thomas.

The biggest negative in that paragraph, IMO, is that Kelly has a "questionable work ethic." Guys with lots of athletic potential and poor work ethics typically fail in the NFL. Add in the other stuff (concern about his knees, the outburst, etc.) and there are too many ways for something to go wrong with this pick.

You express yourself well; and I agree with everything you've written, at least up to a point. The one thing I'd like to add is this: suppose you know that you have mediocre CBs, and suppose you know your pass rush will take 5 seconds to reach the QB. In that case, it would make sense for your CBs to give the receivers big cushions; so that at least you'd be less likely to be beaten deep. But if your pass rush can put the QB on his back in 2.5 seconds or less, those mediocre CBs can afford to be more aggressive in defending the underneath stuff, because there won't be time for the QB to beat them deep. Despite this, good CBs are valuable to a defense, for exactly the reasons you've described. In the above scenario, good CBs would be valuable, because they'd do a better job of defending the underneath stuff, and a better job of defending the deep pass if the pass rush didn't get there on time. Good DL and good CBs are important, and a good DL is even more important. I'm hoping the Bills' draft picks meet the below criteria, in this order: 1. The players should be better than you'd expect given their draft position 2. The players should be at positions of need (I don't want a first day pick used on a running back!) 3. The intention should be for the picks to spend their entire careers here. (I don't want another first round, first contract and out CB.) 4. The players should be at positions which take a while to learn in the NFL I feel the Bills are two good drafts away from being a serious Super Bowl contender. Of the Bills' needs, some are at positions that take a while to learn (C, WR, TE, etc.) while a few are at positions that can be mastered more quickly (DL). If possible, it would be best to get the positions in the first category taken care of with this draft, so that those players will be ready to play at a high level come 2009. For example, the Bills could do the following: 2008 (trade down in first round) 1. (#17 overall) Limas Sweed 2a. C (Pollack) 2b. TE 3. CB 4. FB 5. QB 6 - 7 special teams guys, depth, best player available 2009 1. DL What about the rest of the first day picks in 2009? Odds are they'll be necessary to fill needs which aren't obvious today. In the happy event the Bills only have one real hole (at DL), they could always trade up to take a DL that's higher on their boards. If everything went according to plan, the Bills could find themselves in serious Super Bowl contention come 2009; and could remain in contention for the next several years to come.

In that case, using a 2nd round pick on him is an interesting option. The Bills could trade down in round 1; receiving either a 2nd or 3rd round pick for doing so. If it's a 3rd, they could trade their two 3rds for a 2nd. Then with their 1st round pick, they'd take Limas Sweed. Their two 2nds would be spent on Bennett (TE) and Pollack ©. Owen Schmitt would be taken in round 4. A draft like that could easily provide real answers to each of the offense's major problems.

You're right: it's possible to analyze a player to death; and to magnify every little thing into something significant. I remember when Eric Mould's decision to buy pizza for his team got turned into a big thing prior to the draft. I wouldn't call it a great trade either, because of the mental issues you touched upon. But it still worked out better for New Orleans than Washington!

I agree that Losman has value for us this year. The draft pick we'd be getting in exchange might provide value for the next 5 - 10 years. But if it's a low enough pick, he might not. A lot of this depends on which pick gets offered, and how strongly the Bills feel about the players that will be available in that spot. To the best of my understanding, the formula involved in determining compensation is largely dependent on how much your player is making with his new team. Nobody's going to be throwing big money at Losman, so we'll lose out on that part of the formula. The formula may or may not take into account where a player was drafted. Not only that, but the only way you get anything at all is if your net loss under the formula (through free agency) exceeds your net gain. If we extend Lee Evans, our only significant FA loss after the 2008 season should be Losman himself (with Losman only being "significant" under this formula if it takes into account draft position). Adding just one notable free agent could easily balance that out; or balance out enough of it that all we'd be left with would be some 6th or 7th round pick. Based on all that, I'd strongly consider trading him away for a 4th round pick; and I'd definitely trade him away for a 3rd.

Very true. One of the most important aspects to being a good general manager is knowing how much to trust your own evaluations. Maybe Mike Williams appears near the top of your draft board. But how sure are you that this guy will really pan out? Are you as sure about this guy as you were when Orlando Pace declared for the draft, and you had him pegged as a franchise LT? Or is there more doubt associated with your Mike Williams grade than there'd been with your Orlando Pace grade? Figuring this stuff out is why GMs get paid the big bucks. Hopefully, all the effort they put in will cause them to trade up for an Orlando Pace, but not a Mike Williams. It's funny you should mention that. It reminds me of an article I read about the Ricky Williams trade. According to the article, the actual players Washington ended up with, collectively, were less useful to it than Ricky Williams was to the Saints. That really took me by surprise, because at the time I just sort of assumed it was an example of Mike Ditka making a stupid trade.

That makes sense. If the Bills were to acquire an additional second round pick, do you think it would be worthwhile to take Pollack?

If by "a season from now," you're referring to the 2009 season, the answer to your question WRT the Bills is obvious. Losman will be worth exactly zero to the Bills in 2009, because he'll be with some other team. If the Bills were to use a 3rd round pick on a QB, the plan would (presumably) be for this guy to be the Bills' backup QB for at least the next ten years. Losman will only give us one year of backup services before he leaves. Hmmm . . . 10 years of having a quality backup, or one year . . . hmmmm. I'm not familiar with this year's QB class, so I don't know how Losman stacks up to the Andre Woodsons and Josh Johnsons of the draft. Hopefully, some team will look at Losman's physical skills, and decide that under the right circumstances, with the right coaching, Losman could seriously compete for a starting position. I think a team with the head coach making the personnel decisions would be more likely to make that mistake than a team with a general manager running the show. But you never know; and hopefully there are still GMs who make the mistake of believing that a QB's physical gifts and his upside are the same thing.

I agree that, for 2008 purposes only, Losman may be worth more than a 3rd round pick. But Losman has no value beyond 2008; whereas a 3rd round pick would. Should the team build for this year only, or should it build for the next several years to come? Given that the Bills didn't even make the playoffs this year, I don't see them winning a Super Bowl this year. Better, therefore, to have a player who can contribute in the future (when the Bills will hopefully be in serious Super Bowl contention) than a guy who's on his way out after this season is over.

Yes, DRC has all the physical tools to be an all-pro, but the production just hasn't been there during his college career. I don't like the idea of using the 11th overall pick on a guy who (other than the Senior Bowl) doesn't have the production to go along with his physical skills. If the Bills want a talented CB who doesn't like to tackle, they can always play Ashton Youboty. Also, this team doesn't have a track record of extending its first round CBs. TD drafted Nate Clements to replace Antoine Winfield, a first round CB whom TD didn't extend. Should this management team use a first round pick to replace Nate Clements--the guy they let walk in free agency? I'd rather see the first round pick used on guys who will be here their entire careers. Another factor to consider is that the Tampa-2 is heavily dependent on getting good pressure with the front 4. If the Bills decide to go defense with their first pick, they could either stay put and take Harvey, or else trade up and take Ellis. Spencer Johnson can play either DE or DT. If the Bills took Ellis, they'd likely move Johnson to DE full time. By adding either Harvey or Ellis, the Bills would get a potential game-changer in their front four. Think about the (rare) times you've seen Brady successfully defended. At least from what I remember, most of those times have come when the other team didn't give him time to throw. Bill Walsh once said that the key to winning football games is a good pass rush in the fourth quarter. If the Bills go defense in the first, they should focus on building a front four that can quickly put Brady on his back. I agree that LB isn't a position of need, and that taking Rivers would be a luxury pick. I also agree that no TEs or WRs are truly worthy of the 11th pick, though I could (sort of) see taking Sweed at #11. If the Bills decide to go offense in the first, their best best would probably be to trade down and hope Sweed is still available. Consider this scenario: 1 (17th overall) Limas Sweed 2a. TE 2b. CB 3. C 4. FB This plan would allow the Bills to seriously address all their major needs on offense, while adding a 2nd round player to the defense. The Bills would have to wait until next year to add that first round, game-changing DL. There are a number of ways in which the Bills' first round pick could be used to bolster the offense or defense, over the long haul. None of those ways involve using the pick on some "first contract and out" CB.

Among plausible scenarios, the worst thing this team could do would be to take DRC at #11. This team should not take a CB with its first round pick.