2020 Our Year For Sure

Can you post the scouting report?

I mean Guy and Modrak, the true 'draft guys.'

The current Bills regime also historically drafts well, do they not?

Both articles note he has reliable, natural hands. He may not have the upside to become a dominant player at the tight end position, but he seems like he can become a good reliable target if he can stay on the field.

Thanks for posting, Pete. Its appreciated.

I flipped to ESPN once I realized McKelvin was the pick because I was more concerned with footage than commentary, and ESPN has better footage. Regarding Hardy, he said he liked the pick, said it was good value. They showed a couple of plays I'm sure you've seen before where Hardy goes up and snatches the ball away from the defender. Mayock commented that he excels in the endzone and has a knack for scoring touchdowns. He said one of the few things he didn't like about Hardy when he watched film was plays like "this." "This" being a play they were showing where Hardy had a corner beat on a deep ball and had to deal only with the safety over the top. Hardy's leap wasn't well-timed and the safety made a play on the ball. Mayock made a comment something along the lines of "he needs to go and get that one and help his quarterback out. He seems more concerned with the safety, who is busy making a play on the football." I believe the result was an incomplete pass. They then showed another play that was either a rollout or a scramble out of the pocket. Hardy was on a deep crossing route and his quarterback, under deress, threw the ball downfield for him, sort of floating it out there and leading him quite a bit, giving him a chance to run under it and try to make a play. Hardy came close to the ball but wasn't able to make the grab, and it landed a bit out of arm's reach. Mayock suggested he should have dove for it. FWIW, I'd tend to agree, it would've been a tough catch but it wasn't impossible. As I said before, he said he liked the pick and that he thought Hardy was plenty capable of being a good pro...this was simply the one big question he had about him in his film review.

Sure was. I was particularly annoyed by Jacksonville trading up for a pass rusher on two seperate occassions. Save some for the rest of us, guys...

You're just a blind Losman follower, trying to clean up your thread the same way he cleans up the streets. Time to get over the obsession and accept the fact that your boy will be spending the season on the bench.

Time for Bobby April to get creative...

It wasn't a happy scene in my house when Harvey went off the board. When Jacksonville moved up, we went through the possibilities, and none of us even mentioned Harvey...complete surprise. Ah well, dem da breaks. A bit disappointed the end result of the 1st round was a cornerback, but what keeps me from complaining is that with the board looking as it did, I'm not sure what the alternative was, other than maybe trading down. Absolutely thrilled with the Hardy pick, as the 'current selection' notice came up on the marquee, I was repeating "Sweed or Hardy, Sweed or Hardy, Sweed or Hardy..." Its good to have the team take someone I had my eye on for a change. Hope everyone else enjoyed the day as much as we did here...go Bills!

-Matt Millen

Whether he's overrated or not, there's little denying that Parrish is both a deep threat and a dangerous "YAC" guy. Whether he plays on the outside (aka is a "starter") or in the slot, Reed is still a solid possession reciever, and a reliable 3rd down target with an ability to work the middle of the field. The big, aggressive red zone threat is the missing piece to the puzzle. As for "what if the rookie goes down," you can say that for any position. You simply can't have a 3rd round pick backing up every player on the roster.

Evans and Parrish are the deep threats. Reed is the possession reciever. Parrish doubles as the "YAC" guy. The only role that's missing is a red zone threat. Why, pray tell, do we need two recievers?

Schefter reported the same thing on NFLN.

First off: how many "coverage sacks" do you really think one secondary is capable of forcing over the course of a season? Four? Five? Secondly, who do you think plays a role in more turnovers over the course of a season: your Pro Bowl defensive end or your Pro Bowl cornerback? No position on the football field is capable of forcing more turnovers than an impact defensive end. Strongly agree with your first sentence, strongly disagree with your second sentence. Your linemen are the ones making the opposing quarterback aware that he can't sit back there all day to pick your coverage apart. Without impact players along your defensive front, your secondary (no matter how talented) will be hung out to dry. The reverse is not necessarily true: as long as you have average play from your cornerbacks, a top-notch pass rush can carry a strong pass defense (and force turnovers) on its own. It doesn't require premier performance from the corners (particularly in a system that puts a bit more emphasis on the safeties). If our pass rush is as anemic as it was last season, our CBs could be Champ Bailey and Dre' Bly, and we could still have pass defense issues. Just ask the Broncos, who last season were tied for 23rd in interceptions and tied for 24th in yards allowed per pass play. Upgrading the pass rush, specifically the LDE position, is the road to improving the defense.

Right, agreed on all points. It is in his best interest to wait...but there's a price. There's always a price. It may be an abnormally huge number, but there is some contract the Bills could offer Evans that would result in his re-signing by the end of the weekend. Thats what I mean by "either show him the number he asks for, or don't."

Honestly...what does he care? Show him the figure he asks for, and he'll sign. If you deem him unworthy of that number, let him walk. Its that simple.

Good points all around. I agree that this conclusively PROVES absolutely nothing. What I hope it does accomplish is to raise some questions. Namely, why is there hardly any correlation between 1) adding a premier cornerback, and 2) having a significantly improved pass defense? Are there more variables than we can count effecting the results? You bet. Are there more numbers I could've added to better support the argument? Most likely. This isn't an AKC thread, so there won't be any claims of superiority of knowledge or that anything has been undoubtedly proven. The concept isn't perfect. But yet, if I sat down and did a similar study with defensive ends...instead of ends changing teams, I'd use ends that had emerged with 10+ sacks, and look at the pass defense numbers before and after...I'm confident there would be a stronger correlation between 1) getting a new 10+ sack DE, and 2) having a significantly improved pass defense than I found in the numbers 1 and 2 italicized above. Would you agree? Why is that? That seems like a question which anyone who believes CB is a bigger need position than DE should be able to answer.

The Colts run the same defense too. The difference is in the consistent pass rush.

Hell, signing Evans alone may not be possible.

Correct. While it would be nice to have great corners, the merely good corners we have now will work just fine if we have something resembling a pass rush this time around.

I don't think its just you. I've seen some scouting reports note that he should add 15-20 lbs. onto that frame at the next level.

I'd rather stand pat at 11 and take Harvey, and then trade back up like we did for Poz and McCargo, and get our reciever.

Are you sure about that? I could definitely be mistaken, but I seem to remember Berman hinting at the Bills taking McGahee right before the announcement, saying something like, "Just don't rule it out, you never know..."