Orton's Arm

YOUR POST is the shock of the century!!! In all seriousness, I admired Carucci's analysis long before the Bills drafted J.P. Losman. He used to be a local Bills writer, and I always remember his articles were a special treat. Few if any other local writers rose to his level. That's probably why they let him go national.

Thought so! My next question is this: let's say JP was an ugly dork. What would your opinion of his play be then?

Sold on him as in you think he's a great QB, or sold on him as in you like him?

I've always liked reading Carucci's columns, and I think he's one of the most articulate and insightful sports writers around. Between Carucci and Van Miller . . .

You make a number of good points, especially about how the price the Bills would have had to pay to move up to take Roethlisberger. I'll give you two scenarios of things the Bills could have done differently: Scenario 1: Roethlisberger In the 2004 draft, trade Nate Clements + Bills' first round pick for Houston's first round pick + their second round pick. Then do the following: 1. Roethlisberger 2. OL 2. OL 3. OL 4 - 7 best player available The next year, the Bills could draft a speed WR like Roscoe Parrish (to make up for not having Lee Evans) and a CB to take the place of Nate. Bear in mind that the Bills would have had a 1st round pick in 2005 under this scenario. How would the Roethlisberger price compare to the Losman price? Roethlisberger's price: 1st round pick + part of Nate Losman's price: 1st round pick + 2nd round pick + 5th round pick Scenario 2: Draft Shaub The guy would sit on the bench for a few years, so you could bring in a veteran like Warner or Holcomb, or you could just keep Bledsoe. Since Shaub only cost a 3rd round pick, this option would make your team strongest at the non-QB positions. Shaub's price: 3rd round pick Losman's price: 1st, 2nd, and 5th round picks

You make a compelling case for the Shaub strategy. Given a reasonable percentage of those draft picks working out, your strategy would allow the Bills to be better off for the next several years. But with Roethlisberger, the Bills would have a very good QB for a very long time. Look how long John Elway hung around Denver before finally leading them to two Super Bowl wins. I'm not saying Roethlisberger will be as good as Elway. My point is the longer you can keep a very good QB in place, the more chances you get to get the rest of the team built to give you that ring. You could make a strong case either way--Shaub or Roethlisberger.

Okay, I see what you're saying now.

lol

If you knew the name, you'd be saying it was far too short for a first post. Let me give you a clue. Not a real clue, but a FAKE clue. A big FAT clue. A clue that will give you a SUNNY disposition.

It's really sad that we're discussing Woodbury as a potential starter for the Bills, when he might not even be a starter for NFL Europe.

I disagree. Just about all drafts have early first round picks that turn into busts.

Exactly. It's not like TD merely missed on the Mike Williams pick, only to make up for it later on in the draft. He walked away with basically nothing for the entire draft.

It would be interesting if Part 2 of the Holcomb/Couch battle took place in Buffalo.

Not an inspiring list. I'd say the best of this bad deal are: Sage Rosenfels Jon Kitna Drew Brees (depending on injury) Chris Weinke (had some decent moments on a bad team) Chris Simms Josh McCown Jamie Martin I don't see any obvious upgrades to Holcomb here. Drew Brees, if he can come back from injury. Maybe Josh McCown, though he's a question mark. The question mark theme goes triple for Rosenfels. Jon Kitna was a good QB a few years back, but is he over the hill? Maybe Chris Simms can make a decent career for himself.

Steve Smith or T.O. I think T.O. will be a little more cautious about what he says. He's getting older, and he really got burned by Philly.

Let's look at the Josh Reed pick in a little more detail. With Moulds and Peerless, John Reed wasn't going to be more than the #3 WR. But, you say, TD knew Peerless's contract was running short, so why not draft his replacement? Why not, indeed. But Peerless had speed to stretch defenses, while Reed did not. But, you say, not all offenses necessarily have a deep burner WR. The New England offense, for instance, has receivers who aren't the biggest or fastest in the world, but who have great hands and run great routes. However, the QB TD would soon trade for--Drew Bledsoe--put up mediocre numbers in exactly that New England offense. In his last three years in New England, his passer ratings were 76, 77, and 75. With Peerless, Bledsoe's rating was 86. After Peerless left, Bledsoe's rating fell to 73. The point I'm getting at is that even with Peerless gone, there was no way Josh Reed was going to be the type of #2 WR that a QB like Drew Bledsoe needed. 3-13 teams don't get to use 2nd round picks on career #3 WRs. Not when the OL is full of holes. Displeased with only having made this mistake once, TD decided to do so again. In 2005, he used a second round pick on Roscoe Parrish. We don't need Parrish to start opposite to Moulds, because we already have Lee Evans. As for someday taking the place of Moulds, Parrish doesn't have the size. That's two 2nd round picks--in just three years--thrown at the position of #3 WR. There are five OL positions. How many first day picks have these five positions received in the last three years? One; and that's one fewer than the position of #3 WR.

I agree. I don't like the fact he's still here.

I agree with those who imply the standard the article uses is unrealistic. I mean, I don't think anybody had as good a draft in 2002 as what this author implied the Bills should have had. Having said this, he brings up valid points. Bledsoe's play had been mediocre the last few years in New England, which is why nobody wanted to give up a first round pick for him. Nobody, that is, except TD. Taking Josh Reed in the second--a guy without Eric Moulds' size or Peerless Price's speed--made little sense when there were gaping holes on the OL. As for the Mike Williams pick, it's hard to know whether that mistake was avoidable or not. I know some teams give guys personality tests, and interview those that know them. Could such digging have revealed Williams' lack of desire and toughness? The only way to know for sure would be if teams retrospectively disclosed their draft evaluations on guys. I don't think anyone does this. The bottom line is that in his five years in Buffalo, only six TD draft picks became proven starters. Only one of those was from the draft's second day.

You make a good point. But Maddox's rating was 75 back in 2003, while Roethlisberger's was 98 in 2004. Even allowing for the dramatic improvement in the running game, a 23 point difference in the QB ratings is still substantial. And you also have to look at the fact that in the last two years, Maddox's rating has hovered in the high 50s, while Roethlisberger's has been in the high 90s. But I agree any QB will benefit from a strong OL and running game.

You seem like a pretty decent guy after all.

This is your third post this thread putting me down. Are you trying to kiss up to the Dean or something?

Certainly using a 3rd round pick on Shaub would have been worlds better than using a first, second, and fifth round pick on Losman. It might not have been as good as trading up for Roethlisberger though.

Took you long enough to figure that out.

Excellent article. I miss the days when coaches weren't so politically correct.

Those would have been strong options, and I should have included them in the poll.