Koufax

If this guy surprises and plays and contributes, it is a great signing. If he out performs someone else for depth on the bench, that's cool too. If he doesn't do either and is cut, it is no big deal. Sorry we didn't sign Steinbach today, but this isn't the NBA of 12 man teams, and nobody is handing the guy the keys to the franchise. I don't think this is one of them, but if Marv works his magic and out evalutates other teams to find valuable players, we should hope we end up with a "who?" moment followed months later by "you know...that was a great signing". I know we all want those George Castanza deals where he has a plan to get Griffey, Bonds, and Sosa all for the Yankees, and throw a million names we've heard of at us, but the better path to success as a small market team is to make value acquisitions. Chambers is probably a cut/practice squad guy, but get ready for some non-exciting but very solid pickups in the next couple months.

Very very true. Paying players more than they are worth and following "have to" ideas and overpaying are things that will keep this franchise from succeeding. Samuel will cost more than Nate with zero chance of a hometown discount, and I don't think this team should have one of the top-5 highest paid corners...it will make us a worse team when we have less money to fill other places. I don't think we should look for a glamour off season, so it is up to Marv to find solid guys who are values and draft well, and not necessarily try to get big names that will make the fans happy in the spring. We want a balance of aquisitions that makes us happy in September-January, even if they don't have the glitz that would make people happy in February-June.

Right, this is EXACTLY why we can't pay a player more than his value. Nate is worth a bunch, and is a very good player, but he might not be worth what the market will make him cost, and if not we have to be smart and find other ways to improve our team by getting more value for our free agent dollars. If Nate is the best value we can get, sign him. But I don't think that the drop off from Nate to Ashton (while definitely significant) is as big as the upgrade from Preston to Steinbach on the line, and probably there are much less glamorous options to improve like the Patriots do every year (although hopefully not the Tutan Reyes-type stuff). So I hope Nate stays, but not if he costs more than his value, which is very probable.

Asante has already proven that he will be higher than Nate on the off season wish list. We don't need him to do anything else. What we want is Dan Snyder to settle on him and ignore Nate. That takes one of the big pocketbooks off of Nate and will decrease his value. Continuing to play better will cause Asante to get more expensive and that will raise the market for Nate, so we don't need any more heroics. Just need him ahead of Nate on Snyder's list, and take the biggest spender out of the market. Hopefully we can sign Nate early, but if he does hit the market there will be one less rich team interested. I don't see the Patriots paying what it takes, and I'm not sure if Belichick would want to lock up big money (or franchise money) in a CB. He has notoriously built his secondary economically and had his team better off for it. So losing Samuel will hurt their secondary, but signing him would hurt their overall team with fewer dollars for genius to spend elsewhere. So Samuel leaving NE and going to a big spender who might otherwise want Nate is a win win situation for us. We might take Belichick's wisdom and not lock up too much money in one contract preventing us from improving elsewhere, but at the same time I'd love to re-sign Nate.

I wouldn't take Price #12 either . If Ginn goes undrafted and is a free agent for a relatively small contract like Peerless I'd sign him up. I think #12 would be a little high for Blalock, but I think once you see this market we will probably be better off with Blalock than Steinbach who would otherwise be my top choice. What if we got both? How's that for an upgrade over Gandy & Preston?

Yeah, I think Samuel is a better fit for the Redskins, and will get more flash and attention because of his big INT number, and because of playing well in the post season. This might be the best thing for us keeping Nate, although I think to keep him we probably have to sign him before he hits free agency, which means his situation wouldn't really be too affected by Washington and Samuel.

I should just let this comment die on the vine without a response, but you have to be kidding. LT is the class of this league as well as its best player. He was not sour grapes because of the loss at all, but sticking up for his team and his team's house after a classless celebration by the Patsies. Act like you've been there before New England (wait you have, so you don't even have to act). Like Emmett Smith running TO off of the Dallas star, I think LT getting worked up and standing up instead of sulking off the field with his MVP trophy speaks well of him, not poorly. You can win and you can lose, but you do it with respect for your opponent.

I would prefer to go for it, and would be disappointed to see my team punt. But when it comes down to it, you have to compare your ability to convert a 4th and 15 vs. your ability to force a 3 and out. 4th and 15s are not easy, even though they had just converted a 4th and 10, and have that big 4th and 26 in their history books years ago. They did setup a 3rd and 1, and were one run stuff (in a 100% run situation, 8 men in the box) away from forcing the punt.

:w00t: Neither of these guys played adequately this year, but Pennington is young and big and had to play next to Preston. What's Preston's excuse? I think upgrading RG over Preston is the single most important move of our off season. Not saying that has to be #12 or a particular free agent, but we need someone not on the roster playing RG in 2007 so we can pass protect, and more importantly actually run to the right. And I agree with SacToBillsFan that releasing price isn't a good idea unless we get a value upgrade somewhere else. Price had a decent season, made some huge plays (Texas), and clearly has the ability to be a #2 receiver. I'd rather have a bigger possession receiver, but I don't know that Crayton is a big enough upgrade for the change, and I don't know we will find a big upgrade without locking up too many resources. If we find a great value I will be excited, but I also think we have a better receiving group than a bunch of the teams still playing this weekend, and improving other positions is more important than a marginal upgrade at #2 receiver.

Guys, Mock Drafts are fun to use to learn about some of the players you don't know, and have fun with the combinations, but they have zero relation to what is actually going to happen, especially a year out. Marv will not be drafting a 6 foot tall WR #1. I hope over the coming Months Marv really does his homework (remember last year he was new and worrying about a coach, and still had a good draft) and we get the single best thing you can get from the draft: good football players. And it won't be based on need. Our two biggest needs are RG and LG, but there is no way those are our top two picks, because it is pretty much impossible that those would happen to be the best football players available each time we pick.

I think the perception of him not caring is way off base, and the reason he eats up the Jets is not because of the Vilma thing. He isn't the top character guy who I want to be the face of the organization and a role model to my son, but he is a very good player who got misused under Mularkey and this year had his ups and downs behind a bad rush blocking O-Line and dealing with a painful injury that lingers. I think he catches a lot of the blame that O-Line deserves. He played solid the first four games behind an O-Line so bad it had to be dismantled, then he got shut down against a Chicago team that dominated us as a team, not Willis individually. Then he had a not so great game against Detroit before getting 120 all purpose yards against a Pats team that dominated us and knew how to take advantage of our old O-Line's last game leading our struggling O. Those three bad games were in the terrible three game losing streak when the team had very little to be proud of, and I don't think Willis could be expected to just go off for 100 each game while the team around him was playing poorly (not that he played great). Then we hit the bye, beat Green Bay but he got hurt, and he missed two big stat padding games against Indy (bad run D and our gameplan) and Texas. He came back awfully quick for cracked ribs, and ran effectively (5.3 per carry) against the very dominating Jacksonville line. Then he got shut down against SD which has a very good line, lit up the Jets as usual, worked hard against Miami, played a good game against Tennessee, and then got shut down by Baltimore. So running behind our O-Line which was inept the first half of the season, and was only able to run to the left the second half of the season, he had bad games against San Diego and Baltimore, and a not so great game against Chicago. Let's see, a terrible O-Line that can only run one way and features road graders Fowler and Preston, and he didn't come up huge against three teams that will likely all be playing next week when only the top 4 are still alive. So let's not invite the guy to dinner or make him the face of the franchise, but I can't agree with all the talk that he doesn't care, doesn't try, and isn't good. Improve our line, run the heck out of Willis during his contract year, and all of this Willis hating will be laughed at a year from now. If you don't like that he has three baby-mommas (and he might not be able to spell "baby" or "mamma") that's fine, but don't go overboard mis-analyzing his football ability or drive because of it.

Everybody against Willis, get on record now so I can make fun of you next year. Talk about selling low... Willis is not my favorite Bill, not one of the top backs in football, and I will not be too sad if he walks after 2007. But he is better than he is getting credit for, will play with a more experienced offense and a much better offensive line next season, and will have his contract year motivation (most running backs only ever get one of those in their careers). Willis will have a much better 2007 season than any of the replacement options we could consider. I look forward to Willis starting 16 games in 2007 and the Bills going to the playoffs.

Yeah, but LJ can't run against the wimpy Colts run D, so maybe he isn't good after all. I think Willis needs to step up in 2007 behind our revamped O-Line, and prove that he is a good football player, or else he is done in Buffalo. But it would take a great offer from someone else to consider anything other than rooting for Willis to touch the ball 25 times a game for the Bills next year.

Amen. We know Lee is not a weakness, and I don't think Price, Roscoe, Reed are that bad a group to round it out (especially how Roscoe plays when he is on...we need to get him in more). I would love to upgrade Price with a bigger possession receiver as our #2, but I think this is a luxury we can't afford until well after we have improved our lines and other areas.

I don't think Leon Hall will drop out of the top 10. Best corner available and there is always a team or two needing a corner high.

I'm probably repeating things other people have said, but here goes: McCargo is someone who shows significant talent and is still very young. He needs to stay healthy of course, but there is no reason he should not live up to the expectations Marv had when he traded up to pick him. He did not "beat out Anderson and Williams" in camp, but remember that Coy Wire stayed above Whitner on the depth chart as well, and he was listed as the same position as Triplett (not that he couldn't start along side him at some point, but that wasn't where he was being penciled in as a rookie). I fully expect that his learning this year through camp and the games he played, plus learning and watching while hurt, means that he should contribute even more in 2007, and not be just a rookie, much like Youboty gets a whole year of learning and practicing against Lee and Roscoe and Price. So I'm curious to see McCargo prove it on the field and help us win games, but I don't see any reason for alarm or considering him a bust at this point. I think we could have handled the first two rounds better than we did in hindsight, but that is the nature of the draft. I think McCargo will contribute and we will be fine with the pick three years from now looking back on his 2007-2009 seasons.

I know getting run on a lot took some getting used to, but if you think our D-Line plus McCargo is a bigger need than our O-Line starting Preston/Gandy at guards I would like to wholely disagree with you. If your point is that we will get better O-Line value in free agency or with lower picks that is fine, but I think the "we need Pat Williams back" stuff has gone a little too far. Our D with McCargo and another year in the system will play well, although I would like to add another DT somewhere for the rotation. Getting run over all year was very frustrating, but winning seven games and having another 5 decided by a field goal or less shows that things were not as gloomy as they might seem. The path to upgrading a Tampa 2 is not abandoning it, and we saw how Indy went form can't-stop-the-run to doesn't-give-Larry-Johnson-a-first-down in days. So I'm all for getting a good DT somewhere to go with Larry, McCargo, and Kyle, but I think it is far from our top need, and to pick one at #12 he better be clearly the best player available at that pick. But offensive guard is by far our top priority even if we don't decide to use #12 to upgrade it.

We need to add a DT somewhere this off season. I think where we take him depends on how we go about upgrading our other positions (OG and potentially CB/MLB) and who is available. It could be a low profile free agent to be #4 in the rotation behind Larry, McCargo, and Kyle, or it could be the #12 pick to be our #1 in the rotation above all three of those guys. I personally would rather it be somewhere in between, maybe a good #3 guy ahead of Kyle with a 3rd or 4th round pick, because I think that when the rubber meets the road, OG (or two) and replacements for Nate/London if they leave are more important than tackles, especially with McCargo coming back and Kyle getting a year stronger, and those guys learning to work together better in the system.

I think we can certainly trade the pick if we get more draft value in return. We need to take advantage of some team getting jumpy to get a particular guy or draft a particular need. But I don't think Marv will do it. I would be tempted to trade down if the best player available at our pick is not a OG/DT/MLB/CB/TE, because when you actually make a pick it should be for the best football player available at that pick, and if that position doesn't match up with your needs, take him anyway, or trade down for more picks.

Schobel had a better season and deserves the Pro Bowl nod, and I'm very happy for him. Freeney is a better player, and probably as good as most people rate him, while Aaron is still a very good player and definitely underrated in the past (maybe the Pro Bowl selection will change that perception). I don't think you are necessarily a troll, but the topic was started in a incitING rather than insightFUL way, designed to get a reaction out of the people don't see things the way you do. If I thought you were a troll I would not comment because I believe in a strict do-not-feed-the-troll policy, but I do think that these types of threads don't generally add much to our boards, and prefer threads that present different well formed opinions and explanations of interesting topics.

I'm not as scared by McGee/Youboty, although it is clearly a downgrade. It is a downgrade that might not be as big as people think if Ashton develops, and it is a downgrade that would free resources to improve this team in other positions. I was also wondering how Clements compares to Asante Samuel both in terms of playing ability and contract expectations. Samuel has the side benefit of taking him away from the Pats (although he might be leaving anyway), and if he is cheaper he might be a better value and fit. I still want us to re-sign Nate before he hits the open market, but I don't think we are a team to be in a bidding war for a top-paid free agent CB, even if he happened to wear our jersey in 2006. If we can't sign him before the open market I think we have to consider him lost and move on.

If the only improvement we make to our guards is signing Holland, we have had a failed off season. This is our biggest need by far, and I don't have to specify who we get for each position or where we draft, but we need to make getting the most guard improvement we can. Maybe Gandy can stay if we decide for a big upgrade at the other guard and don't have the resources/players available to upgrade Gandy and get good value, but I would rather see Gandy replaced as a starter along with Preston (no brainer). I also would not want to upgrade center before a second guard, with Fowler having Preston and Merz behind him already and think an upgrade here might be more luxury than necessity compared ot the rest of the line

This is a good comparison in terms of how to be smart and look for the best value and not pay $126 million to a player who is not worth $126 million. But the difference is that the A's work in a different system with big payroll discrepencies that the NFL salary cap does not allow. So we should let Nate go if he costs more than he is worth (if the improvement of having him is less than the improvements we could make with that money if we spend it elsewhere), but I also think he is worth a lot, and should try to make him a pretty big offer before he hits the market. There are many misconceptions about the salary cap, but I think a big one is that since lots of teams have more cap space than in the past (and the money to fill it), yet the players available are no different than a typical year, there will be some drastic inflation this off season. Players will sign this off season for prices that would have seemed impossible last winter, and any players you can lock in before this reality sets in will be available at better levels. So we have to figure out the best way to spend our 35 million (I hope we don't stay under the cap), and signing Nate and London early might be a lot easier than signing Steinbach or Tony Gonzalez in the open market.

Right. I don't think there is anybody other than Peters who we need to keep, but at the same time replacing four people on the O-Line with upgrades (not just warm bodies) is too much. So we have to decide who the tribe votes out. Any of those four could be replaced, so nobody is safe, but I see Pennington and Fowler a notch above Gandy, and two notches above Preston, so we have to pick our options based on what is available, and which of those four pieces are most likely to perform league average or better.

Don't forget LT/Michael Turner in SD. LT is so good that that isn't a huge split, but Turner still makes big carries, and allows LT to get a rest without the team losing production or being forced to pass. I still like Willis as a workhorse behind an improved line. We really did run only one way for half a season, because Preston/Pennington couldn't get the job done. Upgraded guards and I think we have a different story. I'd rather upgrade guards than Willis.