Koufax

Rhetorical question, or are you asking me? Because my answer is 9-7, 10-6 WITH NO HESITATION. Gain experience and lose enough to get a top QB? Get experience LOSING is not as valuable as getting experience winning. And drafting #4 is not that much better than drafting #14 when you factor in dollars and uncertainty. Not just to talk about the top QB busts, but realistically compare these picks in the same draft: Ryan #3 vs Flacco #18 Russell #1 vs Quinn #22 V. Young #3 vs Cutler #11 Alex Smith #1 vs Rodgers #22 Eli Manning #1 vs Rothlisberger #11 I'm not saying I would rather have the lower guy each time, but those are five straight years where a top 10 QB vs a later first round QB is at least debatable. Drafting high doesn't cure this team. Playing winning football and drafting smart does. I'm in 2010 for what we can do in 2010, not for solidifying our next draft position. Back to the original post. If we are healthy this line will be fine. Bell is a project at LT, but is in better position this year even coming off the injury, than as a brand new guy getting thrust in to a no huddle opening week. Gaither would be better, but I think we probably won't give up the picks/players necessary. The rest of our guys give us quality on the line and young depth (so more room for someone to emerge than if it were all veteran depth). A lot of unknowns, but I think we are a lot better than most people think, and Gailey is a good offensive mind to understand the talents we have and design a scheme to work effectively.

Yes, yes, what was Jonathan Ogden thinking. NBA or a Bouncer...no room on the O-Line for that kind of height. http://www.nfl.com/players/jonathanogden/p...le?id=OGD403291

Yeah. We will be lucky to have everything go as well as last year. We need to quit kidding ourselves to think there is any reason to think that this team might be able to win more games than last year's train wreck. Granted we didn't have any injuries last year or coaching problems. I find your ideas intriguing and wish to subscribe to your newsletter. It took four tries to not win 7 games, so with all the potential improvements of this team it would take the us being "lucky" to get to 6 wins. I think this year could break a lot of different ways, and I don't think we will win the Super Bowl this year, so it is a building block that if 5-11 or 9-7 it's okay with me as long as we are moving in the right direction. But I don't think we are blowing up what we had and mailing it in this year, and I don't think our talent and coaching is worse than 7-9 Mauron's reign, so I don't think 6 wins is a stretch or lucky.

Can anybody tell me why this thread is necessary, when there is a 14 page Gaither thread with 260+ posts? I'm not sure if there is anything substantively different in this thread's subject that it should be split off and not keep things in one place. I'm not saying we HAVE TO have a single "Official Gaither Trade Thread", but look around before starting a thread and see if there is somewhere else that might make more sense. I would sure see this "fwiw" OP could have gone on page 14 of that original thread pretty easily.

Depends on how he is in the slot. From the backfield I am happy with 15 or so. Also depends on if McLovin is ready to return kicks at an elite level in which case I think he can share the load on returns. I think he is clearly as a style of player somewhere between Tomlinson and Reggie Bush, and it is up to our staff to make him have an impact. I don't think 25+ will help him make as big an impact. I want him fresh and explosive every touch, and hope Marshawn will stay around to be our masher and wear down the lineman a little.

Keeping Peters would have "cost" us a 1st rounder and more money. So comparing a 1st and loads of money to a second and somewhat less money isn't really direct. Also, Peters had proven that he was willing to hold out and half-ass it for the team that made him. Gaither hasn't held out or demanded anything, and might just be interested in playing with a chip on his shoulder over the whole thing.

I think Bell becomes the backup at LT. I think that is his position whether he can play there or ends up not making it, and he doesn't have any advantage on a move to RT. And Meredith and Wang compete at RT. I too think a next year round 2 is fine, even if we have to pay the guy. Paying a good LT is a good thing for good football teams, and I don't see anybody else here that fits the bill. I don't understand the desire to get rid of Lynch. I think he is a power guy who fits in with Spiller and Freddie, and I don't see us needing to dump him. We need a pick that is worth the move, not just to free up a spot for someone from the practice squad because he got stopped by the cops once and eluded them another time.

No chance the Bills pick #1. Really just a joke and an embarassing lack of understanding by McShay. This team won at least 6 games for three years with Mauron, had EVERYTHING go wrong last year between injuries, the no-huddle cut your left tackle, fire your coach stuff. Other than losing TO (and potentially Schobel) we have more talent across the board. I think this team is in the hunt for the #1 about as much as we are in the hunt for PTR's #32. One game at a time, but this team is much better than people think right now, but probably not good enough to have us excited past Christmas. My hope is that they can build enough that we go into the last few weeks at least with some playoff scenario threads, even if we fall short. I think there is a lot of 2010 before we have to worry much about 2011.

I think Trent's slide from promise and his hot 4-0 start in 2008 relates to the concussion 1st, Mauron's offense 2nd, and the O-Line 3rd. He clearly gets a chance at a better offensive scheme with a better offensive mind and losing one old toy (TO) for one new toy (Spiller). The O-Line will be better than 2009, but could still get in the way and we have a lot of uncertainty. The concussion stuff I have no read on. Hopefully with some distance he can get some confidence back. I still think he is the guy who will win the competition, and has the best chance of the four of being a winning NFL QB. Fitz is a better fit than Brohm for a backup, so if Brohm can't win the job outright I see him falling to #3, and Brown on the practice squad until they like him more as a #3 than Brohm.

Mel Kiper's job is not to be right, it is not to win football games. It is to entertain his audience. The way he does this is by digesting and making accessible what would otherwise be an impossible and unentertaining process. Can you imagine following the draft if there was no analysis and projection, but just college football games and then the draft? It would be like watching the MLB draft after the first round, something only the rediculously over-informed could enjoy. Mel has one view on things that is different just like each of the 32 teams has a board different from the others. I would guess he has fewer resources and man hours going in to his analysis than a typical team, but I could be wrong. He certainly has much less information about each individual team and it's needs than the team's war room does. Kiper makes it fun, but when he is right or when he is wrong or what he says about your team has no real baring on winning and losing football games. He is there to add to our fan entertainment, and he does.

It was not a position of need in terms of formation, but it was a position of need in terms of talent: Playmaker. If anybody doesn't think we got the top offensive playmaker in the draft, for a team that was dismal offensively, I ask (honestly, not sarcastically) to know who did. We are not winning the Super Bowl in 2010, and that wouldn't be any different if Bradford or Okung fell to #9. But this guy is going to be in a Bills uniform in 2010 helping create excitement and win football games, and he is going to be in a Bills uniform in 2013 doing the same. A lot can happen over the next five seasons, so we can keep an eye on Clausen (although a big reach at #9 in hindsight...maybe we shouldn't have passed at #41), Dan Williams, and Bulaga or Anthony Davis and see how smart this pick was in five years. As surprised as I was, I actually love it, and think it helps us be better in 2010 and in the seasons that follow. Being forced to live in the terrible sunshine of San Diego, I watch about 14 Chargers games a year. Despite being lighter, I can't tell you how much he reminds me of LT. Not saying he will be that good, but the way he moves and uses his speed makes me think he is a similar kind of threat. But we will have to wait and see since draft week is not the best time to assess talent, as this was said about LT: "GAZING INTO THE CRYSTAL BALL... Once he adjusts to running from a pro-set instead of a veer offense, watch him grow into a very effective back. Definitely starting material, but he has enough to only garner All-Pro consideration eventually, but this is no franchise back (or anyone else) here, folks. His numbers are very impressive, but he's a product of the team's system. Too bad too many general managers are desperate for a running back, as he'll go higher than his stock dictates."

So you are pretty sure that the #1 pick in the draft is going to be better than the #10 pick by enough to suffer through a terrible 0-16 year, to have that kind of failure for the guys on the 53 man roster who will be returning, and spend 40 million more than the #10 pick? I...DO...NOT...AGREE I have no interest in the #1 pick even via trade up (although if value were there I'd consider it, but that never happens), and certainly not through extensive failure in year one of the new coaching staff. I happen to think Jake Locker is overrated, and might just have a Brady Quinn draft/career arc. If Trent Edwards can get back on track where he was before his concussions under a much better offensive head coach, he will be a good QB. If he can't he will be a backup QB for another team pretty soon, not a mediocre starter for us. And how are we doing things the same over and over? We have a new coaching staff, are moving to a 3-4, potentially a zone blocking scheme, and just had a draft focused on difference makers and big trench guys. I'm sorry we went 5-11,7-9, 7-9, 6-10 too, and I couldn't wait for Mauron "winning football games is really hard" to be our ex-coach, but I'm over it. I'm sorry we didn't get our big name coach, but I also think that Nix/Gailey can do a lot of different things than we have seen, and I'm going to keep my optimism and see how things come together.

Exactly! I was getting ready for my reply to the typical "with the first pick in the 2011 draft the Buffalo Bills select..." post, but then you have us at 6-10, which is okay for a pessimist. The biggest thing I would say from my observations in the past, is that the schedule NEVER plays out how it looks. Two years ago we had @Arizona as a win by just about everybody, because it is Arizona and they are terrible. Whoops, but then they were a Super Bowl team, and we got destroyed, but no chance against the Chargers and @ Denver, but we won both of those games. We might feel like we are locked into 5 to 7 win mediocrity, but the simple truth is the rest of the teams have way too much turnover and variation from year to year for the schedule to be what it seems. It is kinda like the the third round of the draft: not a good place for accurate quick assessments by the casual fan. Regardless of how our team comes together (I remain optimistic), three teams on our schedule will be a bunch worse than we would expect and three teams on our schedule will be a lot stronger than we expect. If Mauron were still coach I would expect us to be in line for six or seven wins, but still wouldn't put my money on which ones. With the new sheriff in town I would put us down from five to ten wins and have no idea which.

Don't forget the 7. Injuries. There is no way (knock on Eric Wood) that this year can be like last, and as our injuries regress to the mean we are a healthier team. Minuses: 1) New schemes on both sides of the ball will take a little getting used to, but hopefully that doesn't hold us back too much. 2) TO and Schobel could take two of our more talented players off the roster, otherwise we lose nobody we will miss. 3) Bobby April. Hopefully his philosophy sticks, but losing him AND having a huge turn over of the coaching staff who might otherwise carry the torch would lead me to believe our special teams are likely to suffer somewhat. I'm on the 8-8 kool aid diet. This is not the year we win it all, we all know that. What would be nice is to feel some excitement and progress right away, and as the season winds down calculating playoff scenarios instead of draft scenarios even if we come up short. The later in the season we play meaningful games instead of just playing out the season the better.

If we liked him more we would have taken him in the 6th where even Marsha was picked. He is competing to be #3 this year with hopes of grooming into #2 (which as we have seen in recent years is an important role across the NFL), but that is fine with me for a 7th rounder. But I officially hope he is instead the super surprise who has people saying "Levi Brown" where they now say Colston.

Private message me and I will take your lunch money on that line, unless that is just a depressed fan talking who hasn't gotten over Scott Norwood. So what you are saying, is that in a year when we had everything go wrong (McKelvin fumble, everybody injured, Mauron no-huddle, fire your OC and cut your LT right before the season, change coaches during the season) and won 6 games, that suddenly we are so much worse than that is the "best" we can hope for? With a weaker schedule I might add? Sorry, but you are way way off here, so let's make a deal. You sit tight, and we will let you know when we have six wins whether it is halfway through the 2010 season or the conclusion of the 2013 season, and you can come back and root for #7 (that Mauron achieved every season he got the chance). We did not solve QB, but don't you think it is likely with Chan working with Edwards (if he wins the open competition) that we will be better there? We did not solve LT, but do you really think we are worse off than 2010 when Bell was thrust in with zero experience next to a couple rookies in an ill-advised no-huddle and then got hurt? Ditto the rest of our line. I expect more out of Wood-Leivitre-Meredith in 2011 than in 2010. Butler would be the loss, but he didn't exactly suit up for 16 last season. It will remain to be seen how our conversion to a 3-4 goes, but we added some big bodies, get Mitchell back from injury, a maturing Poz healthy, and hopefully something rather than nothing from Maybin. A Schobel retirement could have a negative impact, but I see the front 7 better than last year no matter what. Secondary was strong last year and with Byrd getting his wings under him as a second year player, and McKelvin back healthy, I would expect it to be stronger. Receivers right now look worse, without TO and Reed, but that is depth chart, not performance. Pretty hard not to do better than 2010 in terms of performance here. Backfield? We got likely the most dynamic playmaker of the draft ready to make big plays from Day 1. Freddie had a great year, but we are so obviously better here. Special Teams? I miss Bobby April already, so I don't know how much we feel that loss, but getting McKelvin healthy for the return game (and mixing in some Spiller) should help there. So if you ask me (and you shouldn't...I'm a baseball guy who just loves this team), we are clearly improved from a 6-10 bad luck team who had the worst injury season I have ever seen. I don't see how that turns us into a 4-12 team with a six win ceiling, but like I said I am happy to take your money if you weren't just being melodramatic. And P.S.: Never "hope" for the losingest outcome. For every Peyton there is a Jamarcus, I look forward to drafting #32 some day, but I will happily take 8-15 even without the playoffs over 1,2,3. Go Bills!

Ditto...nobody necessarily better than the best of Trent/Fitz/Brohm coming out of camp for 2010. 2011 is a ways away and while I wouldn't have minded seeing Clausen, I would have been very disappointed if we didn't get a NT. OT you just have to think that they didn't like any of the available guys enough with the #41 pick. I like Bell, don't know enough about the possibility of the late guys we picked contributing, but still wish there was a 2nd or 3rd round fit that made sense at LT. We will see how it goes and if the decision is right, but I don't care about being big losers for not getting Kiper's "needs". If we are losers because they don't like the talent of the guys we got then I would be more worried.

Campbell is more of an upgrade over Bell than McCoy is over Trent. I still trust Nix to get us the BPA although as a know nothing football fan I hope the BPA is one of those two

11 more picks before we pick and still Brown and Campbell and McCoy on the board.

Cody to Baltimore. A big change on their overall philosophy...taking two front 7 guys this round I just see him more likely to be lazy and blow up to 400 and am not sad we missed him.

15 more picks before we go and still some players we like a lot on the board, including both Campbell and Brown at LT. After one of them goes we could trade up for the other if that is what we want, there is still Colt, or we could take BPA.

Yeah, because we are worse now than the Holcomb, Losman, Edwards, Fitzpatrick teams that have not sniffed a 3 win season. At least you didn't tock about #1 and Locker I will say it again. I don't know how good Clausen will be overall, but I think Trent outperforms him in 2010. And I think NT was a bigger need than LT. Still some good LT's left too... Only 22 more picks before we get to pick again, and there are some quality players at our positions of need. Either for a trade up or to see who falls to us.

They took the top guy (per their thoughts...I'm not big on Cody either) at what I consider the top position of need and one of the hardest positions to find guys for or switch guys in for. I don't know much about him, but I am very happy to get the top NT available here. I don't think Clausen is necessarily better in 2010 than Edwards, I don't think Campbell is necessarily better in 2010 than D.Bell. I DO think that Kyle was not going to hold down the NT position, and I didn't know where we were otherwise going to fill this. Would he have fallen to our 3rd round? Could we have traded down with this pick or traded up with our 3rd? Probably. But I would guess we got a good football player at our most important position of need.

I agree with the conventional wisdom of the three positions of need, and would love to see one of these filled obviously, and think it is very likely. However if there is a better player available at another position (DE, LB, WR) who clearly rates out as a better talent and contributor over the next five years, I would rather have the better player. 1) I'm not as concerned about our 2010 roster holes as I am us starting a long cycle of adding talented football players to our roster. BPA over need. 2) I'm not 100% convinced that Clausen is a better 2010 QB than Trent if we are drafting for need, or that any of the LT are guaranteed to be better than D. Bell on day 1 either. I definitely think Cody is a better 3-4 NT on day 1 than Kyle Williams or whoever we are filling in there, so he would be the pick for me if we are putting need over talent. To be a need pick, you have to actually be definitely better than the guys on the depth chart you have, not just play the position. So that is a talent evaluation and not a positional evaluation which you seem to be indicating you want to be the deciding factor with our next pick.

I still think Bell has some upside, especially compared to some of these second round guys. Remember he was very raw, and was thrust into the starting lineup at the last minute. I have to think that he is still has the physical talent and will have gotten better in his understanding of the game and technique through both his playing time pre-injury, and the entire year of studying and learning even after the injury. I would have loved Okung, but I'm not convinced right off that there is someone else who as a rookie will be so clearly better than a more experienced Bell. Of course without Butler he could also compete for RT, and adding a new talent to the mix certainly will help our team. But will it be as big a difference as a NT or QB could be? Depends how you evaluate Bell/Trent/Kyle. I still think Trent has some upside if he can shake his concussion after effects and get back to the QB who was 4-0 and throwing the ball downfield a couple years ago, and Gailey might be a good fit to get that out of him. We definitely have no 3-4 NT on the roster, while in Bell and Trent we have some guys who have upside and downside and the Gailey/Nix evaluation about who those two guys really are will determine our pick.