Koufax

Depends on the talent. I would rather have Nnamdi or Revis than McCargo. Not a fair comparison, but if we don't grade the four lineman high (doubtful) and we are in love with Prince or Peterson then they need to take the better player. I know this is the year where we NEED front 7 (despite "adding" Merriman, Troup, and Carrington already), like last year we NEEDED LT/QB. I really hope the best player is a front 7 guy too, but I would rather have future HOF DB than a future pretty good DL/LB. Fortunately I think the talent will be close enough that we will get one of the big 4 listed and put him on the field from week 1. Go Bills.

Fairley > Newton. I see Newton as a Vince Young Jr., not as a Big Ben Jr. If Chan really believes I will trust him, but I hate taking a project at #3.

If his next five years are like this first one, you will have a point. But the reason you take a guy like this with a top ten pick is that you think he can do more than the undrafted guys and be a more explosive play maker. Whether that happens or not remains to be seen, but while I hate the first year lack of production, I care much more about what he does in the next few years, not what he does as a rookie in our twelve loss rebuilding low point.

I also wonder how that factored into other teams and their defensive schemes. Anybody have an idea how many pass plays were run with CJ in the backfield? Would his presence let teams cheat run because it was more likely Freddy would be in there on pass for his superior blocking? Or am I making something up? I think he will get better at it, and I expect to see a lot of improvements and adjustments from year 1 to year 2. I don't think he wants to be a 5 carry/game 300 yard/year scat back, and I think his first season in the NFL will give him some clear things to work on.

We have very high expectations and we should, but I agree with San Jose on just about everything, and I think we have to stop trying to run out of town everybody after a rookie year. I would love some rookie impact and sure hope we get some out of #3, but I fully expect Spiller, Troup, and Carrington to be valuable players over our next five seasons, and not at all in the Maybin/McCargo mold. My concern is about his role and where and when he will fit in in the 4-3/3-4 hybrid. I think there is plenty of room, but on draft day the thought was that he would be our big 3-4 nose tackle, and that seems less likely at the moment, and we know Kyle is an every down type star for us now, so it will be up to Chan to try to figure out the best utilization of the guys, and up to Troup to get stronger and smarter and better in his second year.

Who? Here are 10 through 20 without DBs and RBs (let's not pretend we pick anybody at 9 who didn't go in the top 20): 10 Tyson Alualu DE 11 Anthony Davis OT 13 Brandon Graham DE 15 Jason Pierre-Paul DE 16 Derrick Morgan DE 17 Mike Iupati OG 18 Maurkice Pouncey C 19 Sean Weatherspoon LB I don't see this year's Orakpo or Ngata here or anybody I would really rather have than Spiller over the next five years. I like the Spiller pick even with his rough year, I like the trade of Marshawn because we don't need three RBs, yet I still wish Marshawn well...he always gave everything he had on the field. Let's still hope #3 this year is the biggest homerun of a pick in years

Good for him, and good decision. He will play in the NFL barring catastrophe, and now he will have a degree as well as a chance at a national championship and a Heisman. This is only bad for the Bills 2011 draft. We were not going to get Luck, but he was going to assure that we got one of the top two other players on the board. Now we get one of the top three players on the board. I'm hoping Carolina and Denver do things we wouldn't and we still get the guy that Buddy would take #1, but if Fairley and Bowers go 1/2 we won't be feeling so good about this in a couple months. Now, in a round about way, this could be good for us in 2012. It makes for a deeper QB draft, and means that a top QB could fall to our #11 or whatever slot. Way too soon to worry about that, but I'm just saying that while this makes 2011 worse, it could have a positive effect in 2012. I think we pass on QB at #3 (unless Chan and Buddy have a really different opinion than I do on one of the guys available), and if we have value in round 2 Chan can take a project, and otherwise we can wait until 2012 to draft a QB and know that the 2012 QB class got deeper today. Now let's get a bunch of good football players!

I love the arm. I'm not sure about the player, and we didn't cut JP because of a lack of arm strength. Dig deep Buddy and be sure if you take him. I still can't believe that they didn't return the block for the game winning touchdown though...it's 4th down, even if you kick it around and they recover you still get the ball...can't teach football instincts, but that was almost as bad as the Stanford lineman who caught the deflected ball in the endzone for the safety.

I don't think either of the two CBs will really be clearly the best football player available when we pick at #3, and if it isn't clear and we have several players graded very close together, I would rather see front 7. But I don't see where on this roster we have a player who is a year in year out pro bowl difference maker. So I want to get as many of those guys on my roster any way I can. The easiest chance we will have is #3, and I want to get a great football player. Bowers and Fairley top my list, but I think that Nix will have a better list and the same goal. Leave position out of it, and get us some great football players!

Almost? Why almost? Luck being chosen by Carolina improves the Buffalo Bills by making one more top-3 guy isn't off the board. Unless you are holding out hope of Stanford winning a national championship, I don't see any reason we shouldn't be thrilled when he declares and improves the Bills from choosing from one of the three best non-Luck players to one of the two best non-Luck players.

If those positions aren't the best football players? Other than QB, I think we need to get the BPA every year for a couple years during our building. We aren't drafting to fix our 2011 team, we are drafting to build a great football team. Needs change year to year, but mediocre talent doesn't become elite year to year. Don't reach on one single pick because we like the position please. Something Nix knows well from SD. Franchise QB is a different animal, and fortunately Fitz gives us the ability to pick the right QB in the right round this draft or next and sit him a whole year if needed like Palmer and Rivers. If we like a guy at #3 not named Luck I am fine with that, although I also think that we need to examine all the QBs pretty carefully.

Oh! NOW I get it! You don't mean #1 like a team depth chart, you mean #1 in the history of the position! Ok, then fair point. Stevie is not a #1 in the history of the position WR...I just hadn't realized that was a common "myth". And I Googled and you are right. Jerry Rice was clutch, meaning all of his career drops (2.6 of them) were carefully placed in non-crucial situations, and he never dropped an important ball (small sample size since Rice only played on one or two playoff teams if I remember). He certainly never dropped a deep bomb that would have meant a five win season or anything that important. Whoops...sorry about that...I had my Sarcasm-Lock key stuck.

I agree with most of you comments, but "shore up our weak points" sounds like you think the 2011 draft class should drammatically affect the 2011 season and should be chosen based on 2010 needs. I just see that as bad management, both because draft picks tend to contribute more in years 2 through 5 than year 1, and because that usually means getting inferior players because position comes before talent. Other than that, good points, and try to add the most talent to the roster possible (yes, some front 7 most likely) and with fitz we can pick the right QB in 2011 or 2012 and develop him...not force our #3 overall pick and throw that guy to the wolves hoping he is good. All that said, I see some Mallet/Rothlisberger similarities and I hope he gets a careful look by Buddy.

I think 3 is high for a CB, but it is usually high for a DT and I wouldn't have minded Suh. But a CB for us would have to be a game changing superstar. If we think Prince is that, I don't have any issues based on Jauron drafts or our current roster. But I expect we will go in another direction. I just hope we get a great football player, and I like our chances with Buddy and Chan.

Um....we got him for free. I didn't see Ryan on a practice squad. I would say instead: Wow! We got a 93-grade second rounder for nothing! I know he hasn't panned out yet, but good job adding talent to our roster! Fitz stayed healthy, and Brohm probably doesn't have it, but remember that Brohm is on the bench for the same reason that Fitz was on the bench and Trent was the starter: Chan's evaluation in practice. Fitz took the bull by the horns and hasn't missed a snap and has played above expectations, so Brohm didn't get his chance yet, and might never really get it, but he seems like a good kid and a talented kid, so I don't mind him on the roster, and it wouldn't surprise me if he starts some games for us in the next year or two, the way drafts and injuries go. Back to the original post, what it shows is is true again and again, is that draft grades and draft position doesn't always correlate directly with NFL success. Maybe it is a crap shoot and luck, or maybe our talent guy (Nix) and QB guy (Chan) can do a better job than McShay of identifying who can be a great QB, and we can take someone who will outperform their draft grade instead of underperform it.

If you make your assessment based on one game either way, I think you do so in error. That said, I am really happy with Fitz, but know he is not our QB of the future long term, and likely will not win a Super Bowl. As a four time AFC champion (by fan proxy), I am not really interested in anything else as an ultimate goal. I am very happy with Fitz at QB in 2011, and even 2012 if necessary, and starting our next playoff game when we finally make it. I don't see a QB in the draft who will outperform him for next year (although I think we should keep evaluating the guys that are there). If there is someone who Chan likes enough to study under him this year and be our QB of the future, I am happy taking him anywhere from round 1 this draft to round 3 next draft. We will be a better football team next year, and possibly even a good one, but don't have much of a chance at being great. Fitz allows us to be patient with our selection and grooming of our next QB. If we got Luck and he was ready to start in September, great...Fitz is a great backup. If we get the next Rivers or Palmer and they sit a full year, great. If Mallett is our Big Ben, great. If Locker is Chan's project and takes a while to be ready great. What Fitz gives us as a rebuilding team is choices and patience. What we don't have to do is pick someone because we "need" a QB. We can find the right player in the right round in the next draft or two, and not weaken our team by reaching for someone who is not likely to be great.

No. The draft philosophy should be to get the best football players. Using some positional usefulness as a tie breaker on nearly identically rated players is fine, and I'm sure we will have some picks where it isn't clear cut and we have choices without sacrificing BPA, but rookies don't always fill a need before that need morphs into something else. While I hope we don't go RB/CB/Punter in the top three rounds, there are enough positions where we need to get better that we can just try to pick the best football player over and over again. Do this year after year and we will stop having a JV roster. Last time picked Troup because that was one of our big "needs" and we failed to pick our other needs of LT and QB. Troup ended up not being a difference maker right away, and Kyle is our guy (although I am optimistic that Troup will be a good player for us). We have done fine this year at LT and QB, and have been punished with our DEs and LBs which weren't our perceived top needs on draft day. This isn't grocery shopping, this is a draft, and if we stay true to a goal of putting as much talent as possible on our roster we will be better off than any other strategy.

In three pages of disappointing short sighted posts, I will give this one a +1 We don't have to push the BPA stuff to extremes (I hope we don't get one of the two top corners, but that's just me), but what we need is to get great football players and have a little patience. Right now there is a lot of front 7 talk, but it makes me laugh. Yes that is what I think we need most and what I would be most excited about signing in a decent free agent, but: last year everyone said our need was OT and QB, we didn't draft either, and now people don't think OT and QB are necessarily our biggest needs. Things change and with the draft you have to get the best football players you can find, not pick positions of perceived need, because those needs shift before the guys you picked are ready to be stars a lot of the time. So I am happy that a lot of the top talents are front seven guys, because I think that matches up with things, and when BPA and need match up, that is even better. But for a QB, Fitz has proven that we don't need to get a QB. There are very few rookie QBs who will perform at his level, so getting a pretty good QB is not going to make us better in 2011. I think if we get a QB it is because we see a guy who we can envision in a yellow jacket and rings, or a second or third round value pick who Chan things he can develop while Fitz plays. Obviously I would pick Luck, and even trade up for him if Carolina wanted to, but I don't think he is coming out so that won't matter so much. As for Mallett, the focus of this thread, if our football guys think he has a good chance to be a Big Ben or a Bledsoe then we take him. If our talent evaluation and projection is later than him, we skip the "need" to get a QB for that round of this year, and we take the best football player we can. I haven't seen him play enough to really feel comfortable with my own opinions of him, but I do think there is some Big Ben/Bledsoe in Mallett. As much as I would like a Fairley or Bowers, if Mallett grades out, then I am very happy taking a franchise QB who is not the first QB chosen (Rivers, Big Ben, Flacco, Rodgers), but that is a much higher threshold than just being the second best QB in this draft.

Wow, I'm not sure where to start. 1) Fitzpatrick has done a great service to this team. He has taken away the absolute need to get a QB right away. I think that is very valuable. It means we can approach the next two drafts trying to get great football players and make our roster into a more talented one to help build a strong team faster. 2) Fitzpatrick is not our QB of the future, but can be a successful bridge as we build, and help get us to a winning season, a playoff appearance, a playoff win. Very doubtful he is going to be a Super Bowl win. It is fun to cite the defense first Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer wins, but the reality is since the Bills were playing in Super Bowls, those are the only two wins without a stud QB, and those were both with stud defenses. Fitz wants to try to turn into Kurt Warner if he is going to be a winner, not hope that we can win it all with an okay QB. 3) I love the passion behind the "multiple super bowl" comment, but that just isn't the case. We want to build a team that can compete for multiple Super Bowls, but I think we would all take winning one and competing year after year. 4) To whoever said we are 4 and 10, we are not. We were 0-8 last half season. This half season we are 4-2 trying to keep building. Otherwise just say we are 29-49 (the last five years) if you want to pick an arbitrary time frame . I am joking of course, but you really do need to be able to see past 4-10 and see 0-8 and 4-2 and understand the tale of two halves as we continue to build this thing. 4) All that said, if we don't draft a first round QB in the coming draft, we are fine. If we don't draft any QB we are fine. Chan knows what he wants from the position, Fitz gives him the opportunity to pick his guy even if he isn't ready yet, and take a year or two behind Fitz to get ready. So I see us taking a 2nd or 3rd rounder this year or next, unless a great 1st rounder falls to us. Giving up any value (trade the draft for Luck, etc) doesn't make sense for a team that needs to get better at a lot of positions. I am a happier Bills fan right now since any point since we were 5-1 behind Trentative. Next week will be tough, but I'm excited to watch this team get better. We have taken some of the elite to OT, but this is the first time in a long time that we have beaten a playoff contender, a division rival, or had a road win against a solid team (last year's Peyton-less Indy doesn't count). Go Bills!

Not beating out Kyle Williams is not an insult to anybody the way he has been playing. Carrington sure has looked like he has a lot of upside now that he has gotten on the field. I think Troup and Carrington will be good players for us, but that is more hope and faith in Nix than any real evidence. But trading up for a tackle reminds me too much of the McCargo situation. As well as Safford has played, I just don't think giving up two good players for one makes enough sense unless you are really convinced that the guy is worth it. I would rather make two good picks to help our team than reach for one. If you are basing it off of 2010, I think Bell has been good enough compared to Bulaga/Saffold to make taking two high picks on our front 7 away not such a good idea. If you are basing it on 2010-2015 like I think picks should be judged, it is much too soon to know, but I would rather have two good football players than one, so a 2 for 1 trade for a team with a shallow roster like ours better be a home run and not a McCargo.

No, the question should be who do we think is the better football player when we pick. I really like Fairley, but I think there are four or five defensive beasts who could easily end up being the best player when we pick.

If you don't want to build a great football team. If you want to build a great football team get great football players. When it is your pick, see if the LT or the DE or the LB or whoever is the best player. If you think the quality of player is the same, pick the one you need more. But if you reject a better LT for a DE, or a better LB for a LT because of what you think your 2-10 team needs, you aren't going to get the most value over five years of that pick. And if you do that over and over you are going to end up with a mediocre roster instead of a strong roster. And I know Buddy is going to do that (since Spiller was at a position two deep with good players, but it didn't matter since he was considered the most talented guy available). I know that gets us upset after a dozen weeks of a career, but I want this team to be great again and eventually win the Super Bowl they couldn't in the 90s, and the best way to help that cause in the draft is to get the absolute best football players we can each and every pick, and not worry about what positions they play and what we think we need right at that moment. Maybe coming off a 10-6 playoff season down the road it would be okay to focus on short term goals to round out that talented team at the sacrifice of longer term value, but coming off our 2-14 to 6-10 season this year I want the BPA each and every time, and have not heard a single good argument against that.

That's the key. I don't think the Pats beat us at the draft because they have more picks (although the OP opens your eyes for this year). They just draft better.

I am guessing you are drafting based on what you feel our needs are. So I am giving it a thumbs down. Try this one: 1. BPA 2. BPA 3. BPA 4. BPA And I think that will work a little better for our team.

I'm not completely sure, but I'm pretty happy with his performance this year and his upside. Even more than Fitz does for the QB position, he puts us in a position to get the best players available, and only get an LT if he is the best option at that pick. I can see that upgrading our front 7 based on the talent that is out there. I'm pretty happy with our line, just a matter of months after we were beaten up for not picking anybody before the 5th. Get good players unless you have a total and complete void. With Bell we don't have a void (and the same with Fitz), and that puts us in a better position to get better faster by not trying to patch needs. I am an eternal optimist, but I think his upside is really impressive given his growth in his first years of organized football and the circumstances he had coming in to this year that everyone has mentioned.