Orton's Arm

I disagree. A number of years ago, the Rams used the first overall pick on Orlando Pace. Orlando Pace later became a critical part of the Greatest Show on Turf. Pace's blocking gave Warner time to stand in the pocket and let his WRs get open. To take another example, Jon Ogden was chosen fourth overall, and went on to become a key part of the Ravens of 2000 Super Bowl winning team. You make a good point about Matt Ryan. If you have a choice between a franchise QB and a Hall of Fame player at literally any other position, you take the franchise QB! A franchise QB fundamentally changes the equation for your team in a way that a franchise player at any other position does not. Under normal circumstances, it doesn't make sense to use a top-15 pick on an offensive lineman, unless you have a need at LT, and are using that top-15 pick to fill that need. The Bills aren't in that situation: Glenn looks like he's going to be a perfectly good LT. Most plans I've seen for the Bills to draft an OL at 8th overall involve either drafting an OG, or else creating a hole at LT by moving Glenn to guard. (And then using the 8th overall pick to fill the hole thus created.) Using the 8th overall pick to replace Levitre--which is what either plan would amount to--would be a luxury move for a team which lacks basic necessities. The Bills have needs at premium positions: pass rusher, CB, #2 WR, and above all, QB. They should use that pick on a QB, if there's any QB good enough or close to good enough to justify the pick. If not, they should use the pick on a player at some other premium position of need, assuming there are any players like that good enough to go 8th overall. If neither of these things are options, they should look to trade down. (Especially if the trade-down involves acquiring someone else's first round pick in the 2014 draft.) If there are no reasonable trade-down offers, then and only then should the Bills consider using the 8th overall pick on a player at a non-premium position.

If Carrington counts as a DE, then that would significantly improve my assessment of the depth at that position.

I hadn't seen much of Manning's play this past season, so for now I'll assume you're probably right about him. As for Brady: my impression is that he's slipped a little. In the playoff game against the Ravens, for example, some of his throws were a little off. These were throws late in the game, in key situations. Throws that the Brady from five years ago would have made. The Patriots are still getting very good play from their QB position, and can expect more very good play going into next season. But the Patriots can no longer count on Brady to consistently play at rarified heights. There will still be times when he plays at a truly elite level, but more and more those times will be intermingled with times when he looks as he did late in the playoff game against the Ravens.

If a QB puts up a very good rookie season, you don't necessarily know whether you're looking at an anomaly or a taste of things to come. If, on the other hand, a QB starts off his career by putting up five consecutive very good seasons, odds are you're looking at a pattern. That is the reason you take past accomplishments into account. However, the pattern a QB establishes in the prime of his career is not necessarily the best possible predictor of how he'll do as he nears retirement. Toward the end of his career, Dan Marino was a shell of his former self. Much of Jim Kelly's skill had also faded by the time he hung up his cleats. Brett Favre didn't exactly set the world on fire during that last season with the Vikings. Peyton Manning had the second-best 2012 season as ranked by yards per attempt. There's a very good chance he'll continue to be a top-5 QB in 2013. On the other hand, Ryan achieved a slightly higher YPA in 2012 than did Tom Brady. From a statistical standpoint the difference is meaningless. More telling is the fact that in the postseason, Brady didn't look like the same guy he'd been a few years ago. Even though Brady is slightly younger than Peyton, it's possible Brady is further along in his late career skills decline than is Manning.

One way of ranking QBs--or any player, really--is to ask the following question. If you had to pick a QB for the upcoming season, which would you expect to play the best? Whoever that is is your top-rated QB. My expectation is that Peyton Manning won't deliver one of the five best performances in the 2013 season, which means he's no longer a top-5 QB on my list.

For once, you and I agree on something.

This past season, Ryan ranked"]http://espn.go.com/n...sAttempt]ranked seventh[/url] in yards per attempt. He also had a TD/INT ratio of better than 2:1. San Jose Bills Fan made a good point in that Ryan has good weapons--a fact which will tend to inflate his stats. But Tony Gonzales is no spring chicken, and some of the other QBs in Ryan's general statistical neighborhood have good weapons too. I think it's fairly safe to conclude Ryan is a top-10 or top-12 QB.

Good post! I was against drafting Mallet a few years ago, and I'm against trading for him now. There are issues with him--especially his ability to read the field quickly, and process information rapidly--which make me very cautious. I'm also not sold on his accuracy. There are guys in this draft who have a significantly better chance of becoming franchise QBs than Mallet has. The Bills need to draft one of those guys--assuming there's anyone in this QB class they like enough to draft. Trading for Mallett would be spinning their wheels.

A few years back, I read the book Patriot Reign. That book made it clear that Belichick's impact on the Patriots went far beyond just Xs and Os on the field. (Although even with Xs and Os, Belichick is in a far different league than Jauron.) Belichick brought a disciplined approach to every aspect of the Patriots' organization. One example of that discipline was Lawyer Milloy. In discussions about why the Patriots were paying him so much, some people in the organization mentioned his big plays. Belichick's response was, "What big plays?" It had been a year or two since Milloy had stopped making many big plays. Others in the Patriots organization got caught up in a certain habit of thought "Milloy makes big plays" and didn't adjust their thinking to changing circumstances. This incident may seem minor, because all that was in question here was whether the Patriots would overpay their SS by about $1 million a year. But minor issues add up. Another, far more important aspect Belichick brought to New England was his approach to player evaluation. One of the mistakes which had been made back in Cleveland was that players were selected mostly for their physical traits. Belichick learned from that mistake, and in New England arranged a more disciplined approach. His new approach involved a greater emphasis on the player's passion for the game, discipline, intelligence, and other factors. Belichick is a source from which discipline radiates. It's hard to quantify the effect that discipline has, except that it's very significant.

Very good thread! I appreciate the link, and all the effort you've put into analyzing QBs. Not to quibble, but if Aaron Rodgers doesn't qualify as a "star" under your system, then you need a new system. Especially because Pro Bowl appearances don't necessarily mean a whole lot, as Donte Whitner has recently shown us. Another way of evaluating QBs would be to use yards per attempt. Any QB with a career yards per attempt in the 7.2 - 7.3 range would be borderline franchise, and any QB at 7.4 or above would be franchise. If you did it that way, Aaron Rodgers would be counted as a franchise QB (as he should be). If you've undercounted the number of star QBs in the league--as I believe you have--then Nassib's statistical odds of becoming a franchise QB (if he's selected in the first round) would be greater than 8%. But even if the true odds are 15 or 20%, I agree the odds are still against us. The best way to beat those odds is to do a better job of QB evaluation than a typical NFL team does.

I stand corrected. The emphasis here being on the commanding, masculine nature of my stance--not on the fact I was just corrected! You make a good point that a non-playoff season is out of the ordinary for the Patriots. But 11 wins in a season doesn't seem that much different than their usual.

The article you'd mentioned had the following to say about Nassib: "I don't think he's talented enough to be a star, but in the right system, he can be a quality NFL starter." A critic could point out--correctly--that the Bills don't need "a quality NFL starter" at QB. They need a star. One possibility would be to take Nassib anyway, and hope he does turn into a star. Even if there's only a 20% chance of that happening, that 20% chance might be worth the 8th overall pick.

There was that year that Brady was hurt, and the Patriots went with Matt Cassell. IIRC, they had a very solid regular season record that year, and made it deep into the postseason before being eliminated. Their Matt Cassell season, alone, does not prove whether Brady or Belichick is more valuable to that team. What it does prove is that Belichick has very significant value, and that the Patriots are not just a Brady injury away from being Dick Jauron's Buffalo Bills. Belichick has more intelligence in his right pinky than Jauron has in his entire brain; and that makes a real difference on Sundays.

Good post. I'd argue that a good LT--as Glenn has the potential to be--is far, far more valuable than a good OG. While I like the idea of locking Levitre up now, I don't want that to come at the expense of getting a deal with Glenn done a few years from now. As for whether it would make sense to add Warmack to the Bills' war machine: I think what you have to do there is to compare the best available player at a premium position of need (QB, pass rusher, CB, WR) to Warmack. If any of the available premium position players are even close to Warmack, you go with one of them. But if Warmack absolutely destroys all of them in the player evaluation process, then maybe he becomes a consideration. Because if Warmack absolutely destroys the other guys available when the Bills pick, then that probably means none of those others were that exciting anyway. But the Bills could also use a 3-4 NT. An elite NT can produce even when using two blockers; thereby freeing other defenders. A good NT is more valuable than an equally good OG. As to the other parts of your post: the idea of not over or underspending on any one part of your team makes sense. But plans like that should be flexible, based on opportunities. For example: the Bills are currently spending a large sum on Kelsay's contract. That does not necessarily mean that the Bills can rely on Kelsay to provide the DL with a consistently high level of play. The fact that the Bills are overspending on Kelsay shouldn't cause them to overlook opportunities to add talent to the defensive line, either via the draft or free aency. If anything, the first step in your roster evaluation process should not necessarily include salary cap considerations. Instead, a GM should look at the roster he has, and compare that to the roster he wants to have. He should then take advantage of available opportunities to transition from the former to the latter. If a particular player's salary gets in the way of said transition--if he's being paid more than what he's worth--he should be given a pay cut, or released outright.

I disagree. This team has too many needs at premium positions to use the 8th overall pick on a non-premium one. Especially when the hole we're talking about filling would be self-inflicted (by letting Levitre walk).

Anyone who hasn't yet clicked on Dibs' link should immediately do so. It's a great, content-rich OP. But you've lumped all offensive linemen together. This means that if an OG drafted in the second or third would be more likely to succeed than a second or third round C or OT, that difference wouldn't show up in your analysis. I agree with your point that using a second or third round pick, at any position, is very far from a guarantee of filling a hole. If a team like the Bills uses a second or third round pick on a non-premium position, like OG, and if said player doesn't work out, then in a few years they can use another second or third round pick on the same position. It's not a great solution. But it's better than using a premium pick (8th overall) on a non-premium need (OG). Especially for a team which has other needs at premium positions (QB, pass rusher, CB, WR, etc.).

If Levitre walks, there's no way the Bills should use the 8th overall pick on his replacement! You can get good OGs in the second or third round.

Over the last 10 years, there have been three times when the Bills have let their DB with the best combination of youth + proven accomplishment go first-contract-and-out. After that happens, they'll typically use early picks on replacements for the departing DBs. Another possibility is to hold onto one's best DBs for the entirety of their useful careers. Other than McGee, I can't think of a particularly good Bills' DB who remained with the team for an extended length of time. (At least not in the last 15+ years.) The fact that they seem interested in holding onto Byrd (as opposed to letting him go first-contract-and-out) is a good thing.

> A friend of mine told me his brother was being carjacked and shot the culprit, didn't kill him tho. The brother > got more time in prison for having an unlicensed handgun then the carjacker did. That's some really messed-up legislation right there!

> You tell me what is driving this bogeyman attack on him? That he is a jerk? We're agreed that he's a jerk, and that he's self-centered. His personality, or lack thereof, is one of the reasons why he's received negative attention on these forums. > Whatever you think of Donte, a mediocre player, when he played for us he played hard and with passion. I'll grant he'll give you a few highlight reel hits every now and then. That in itself should not necessarily be taken to mean that he plays every snap with passion. Other than his occasional hard hits, what evidence do you have that he plays any harder than is normal for a starting safety? > He doesn't deserve this unwarranted assault on him because he with his lofty draft status represented why this is a failed organization. Why are you emotionally invested in defending him? > I simpy believe that a lot of the criticisms he is attracting is due to the fact that he left a loser organization and landed on a SB competing team. I can't speak for others, but I felt no bitterness over the fact that Rob Johnson was part of the Bucs team which won the Super Bowl. Like Whitner, Johnson also cost the Bills a first round pick, and also didn't work out as planned. Likewise, I felt no resentment toward Antoine Winfield for being part of a reasonably well-run Vikings organization; or toward Antowain Smith for being part of the Patriots' first two Super Bowl wins. (I objected to the first round pick-->first-contract-and-out drafting strategy Winfield represented, but never took my frustration out on Winfield personally, either as a person or as a player.) Several differences between those guys and Whitner: By the time those guys left the Bills, none were associated with empty hype. Compare that to Whitner, who received a completely unearned Pro Bowl invitation. Plus plenty of (completely undeserved) support on these forums. Whitner's mouth is bigger than the other three guys' mouths combined. As a team, the 49ers worked very, very hard to achieve everything they did. They came so close to winning it all. After the Super Bowl, did Whitner apologize to his teammates or the fans for letting them down so very badly? Did he express a sense of remorse, of heartbreak, because his own failures had prevented his teammates' hard work from resulting in a Super Bowl win? No. He did none of these things, took no responsibility for the Super Bowl loss, and did not acknowledge the effect his poor play had on his teammates or the fans. Whitner's putrid performance cost his team a lot more points than Norwood's missed kick cost the Bills. But instead of showing any sign of Norwood-style heartbreak, Whitner briefly acknowledged he could have played better, and then almost immediately began bragging about hypothetical future accomplishments. Had Whitner said, "I'm heartbroken because of how I let my teammates down," my respect for him would have increased. But nothing I've seen from Whitner which would suggest that he does care about how badly he hurt his team. That being the case, why should you care about protecting him from hostility on message boards like this?

There are several things you've done in the above post with which I disagree. 1) First, you are spending too much of your attention on telling other people how to devote their attention. 2) Second, you are criticizing Badolbellz for having made correct statements about Whitner, without also leveling the same criticism at CBiscuit for his inaccurate statements. Why is it that you're asking Whitner's detractors, but not his supporters, to move on to other subjects? 3) Third, you seem to be under the impression that even intelligent, informed fans of poorly run organizations like the Bills have no right to criticize bad players on good football teams. Is the reverse also true? Do you think that unintelligent, uninformed fans of well-run organizations like the Patriots have the right to criticize good players on bad football teams? Would you say that some idiot who criticizes Spiller on a Patriots message board is granted an aura of credibility due to the discipline with which the Patriots are run? If not, then why do you suppose that Bills fans automatically have an aura of anti-credibility? 4) Most importantly, you seem to be assuming that criticism of Whitner is driven entirely by bitterness about the squandered draft pick. I admit that may be one factor in the Whitner criticism. But there is another: the desire to see things exactly as they are, without the benefit of rose colored glasses. Well-run organizations are known for this. When Whitner's supporters make inaccurate statements about him or about his level of play, why do you object to those statements being corrected? Moreover, to the extent that criticism of Whitner is caused by bitterness, you're not going to get rid of that bitterness by complaining about it, or by telling Whitner's detractors to remain silent while his supporters sing his praises. The way to get rid of bitterness is to substitute some positive goal to be achieved in its place. Any attention used to achieve the goal is attention unavailable for bitterness.

They were going to call it that. But then they realized that Shaver has six letters, and razor has only five. Fewer letters = more simplicity = better. Hence the fact it's called Occam's razor.

>I do remember one poster pointing out the Bills were getting insanely lucky in terms of turnovers etc after the start > and that it could not be maintained, and I think he was critical Fitz and he was crucified on here, and I mean really destroyed. That was me. But even after I've been proved right about Fitz, I still think the Sanchez extension was considerably more boneheaded than Fitz's.

> You just reek of douche. No he doesn't. He reeks of telling it like it is, without being gullible enough to buy into empty Whitner-related hype. > But obviously since a cranky guy on an internet message board says Whitner sucks, he must obviously suck. I take it you didn't watch the Super Bowl? > You're right, and Harbaugh & the pro bowl voters are wrong. The 49ers signed him to a below-average contract. They were not wrong: Whitner is a below-average safety, and they're paying him what he's worth. Nothing more and nothing less. The idea that Whitner's Pro Bowl selection had anything to do with his level of play is a complete myth. Write the name of each starting SS on a 3 x 5 card, tape those cards onto the wall, and throw a few darts at your wall. Most of those darts will end up hitting better SSs than Whitner. This includes the darts which didn't hit any 3 x 5 cards at all. There's a lot about Whitner which has gotten him name recognition among casual fans. First, he got drafted 8th overall. I recognize names like Eric Berry and Michael Huff based on their draft position. I have to assume a lot of fans from other teams are the same WRT Whitner. Those fans get to cast votes for the Pro Bowl. Then there's the fact that Whitner got to be part of a successful San Francisco defense. Those who don't watch the games closely might assume that the 49ers' defensive success was in part because of him; as opposed to having been despite him. Show these fans a few highlight reels of Whitner making big hits, and they're sold. Any serious fan who's watched Whitner in pass coverage for any length of time knows the 49ers have a hole at SS.