Cash

My understanding was that 50-59 was basically okay for centers, but not guards or tackles. Seems to have gone out of vogue somewhat, possibly because expanding rosters have put a premium on those numbers. You can basically pre-order the jersey on the website. Once the number is chosen, they'll print them up and start sending them out.

Totally agree with both of these. That's my hope as well.

Mike Evans, even over Watkins. Don't want a trade up though. I want Troy Niklas in the 2nd. Could live with any OT but Lewan in the 1st or 2nd, though.

Totally agree. I've been on the Mike Evans bandwagon for a while, but if we can't get Evans, I'd just as soon not draft a WR at all, or wait and see who drops out of the Lattimer/Moncrief/Bryant/etc. group. I just happen to think that Evans is a special talent who also perfectly fits our/EJ's needs. I just don't see any appeal in adding another decent-to-good WR. We already have Stevie (presumably), Mike Williams (for at least a year), Woods (who I don't like nearly as much as most posters, but he doesn't suck), and Goodwin as WRs who can definitely play. Add in the ghost of a chance that Graham does something, plus the 4-5 lottery tickets at the end of the depth chart, and I don't think we gain much by adding a guy like Beckham. I'd be totally underwhelmed by an OT pick at #9 (especially Lewan or Martin), but if it's between Martin and Beckham, sign me up for Martin. At some point, the Bills (and their fans) are going to learn that you don't get better by cutting/trading your few good players (i.e., Stevie) and drafting their replacements. You get better by keeping your good players and supplementing them with other good players from the draft.

Mike Evans will have a better career than Sammy Watkins.

Interesting. Tell Daryl thanks for the research! Now if only I knew a beneficiary...

Good article.

Bills will draft at least one RB or DB in the first 3 rounds.

I think they set out to have exactly 2 gold games and exactly 2 bronze games -- or at least a minimum of 2 bronze. Just having 1 in the first year of variable pricing could look sleazy from a PR standpoint, and if there's one thing the Bills do well, it's marketing/PR. Given that, it's hard to argue for any of the silvers over the Browns/Chiefs. Weather's too good for Chargers/Vikings. Jets are a division opponent. And while the Packers game is rough weather-wise, they're too premier an opponent to be in the bronze tier. I was initially surprised they weren't gold until I remembered that the game was in December.

Well, Florio remains, as always, an idiot. But just as a broken clock is right twice a day, I think he's completely on point here. This changes nothing. Realistically, we already knew that any buyer would give a song and dance about keeping the Bills in Buffalo (just like Clay Bennett did with Seattle). Even if a buyer was dead-set on moving, there's nowhere to move to right now: Neither LA nor Toronto has an NFL-ready stadium at this point. I'll be pretty surprised if the Bills move before the out clause in 2020, regardless of who buys the team.

I just read the article, and while it's cool that that clause is there, I found Kryk's analysis overly simplistic. It's like he never heard of Clay Bennett or the Seattle Supersonics. Any "move" buyer is going to come in talking about keeping the team in Buffalo, and do so till at least 2019. Kryk makes a decent point that said buyer needs to actually convince Erie county of his sincerity, but I still don't take it to mean much.

Yay!

Here you go sir: http://www.buffalobills.com/video/videos/2013-Bills-Draft-Luncheon-Press-Conference/64777a4d-6fe9-4806-adea-f4dff890bd41 I think it's around 25 minutes in or so? Could be a earlier. I feel like Kelly, Thurman, and Reed had a lot more to do with changing the balance in the AFC East than Biscuit did.

Very good read, thanks for posting! My main quibble with the author's breakdown is that from the way Whaley was talking about the Rivers signing, it doesn't seem like Lawson has much of a place in this scheme.

Bumping this because Fanspeak ditched Optimum Scouting (or whatever it was called) and replaced them with something called DraftTV and Ourlad's (I've heard of them -- could be a good addition on the cheap?). I tried a 5-rounder with DraftTV and got a result that you ground & pounders would probably ******* over: 9 OT GREG ROBINSON AUBURN 41 G GABE JACKSON MISSISSIPPI STATE 73 TE TROY NIKLAS NOTRE DAME 109 RB CARLOS HYDE OHIO STATE 149 ILB SHAYNE SKOV STANFORD

1. Johnny Manziel - Minnesota Vikings 2. Jadeveon Clowney - Houston Texans 3. Blake Bortles - Jacksonville Jaguars 4. Khalil Mack - Atlanta Falcons 5. Mike Evans - Oakland Raiders Just for the hell of it, I checked my past results. 2010: 0/5 (fun fact: CJ Spiller was the first, and to date only, player in these contests drafted by the Bills. 2011: N/A (lame) 2012: 1/5 2013: 0/5 I'm batting a solid .067. EDIT: Went with Evans to the Raiders, just so someone has him going somewhere besides TB. Still think Tampa takes him if he's there, but maybe Al Davis' ghost falls in love with Evans' size and speed?

Wow, lotta progressive thinking in this thread. I guess it's always 1958 somewhere.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/13289/tony-moeaki A "complete comeback" still wouldn't be anything special. I don't want a TE in the 1st either way (I want Niklas in the 2nd), but let's not pretend Moeaki is some superstar waiting to break out. He *could* be a decent player.

"Spiller, 26, has 3,021 career rushing yards, 1,070 receiving yards, 1,157 kick return yards and 302 punt-return yards to go along with 18 touchdowns." Sayers through his first 4 seasons (per PFR): 3,834 rushing yards, 1,197 receiving yards, 2,442 kick return yards, and 391 punt return yards to go along with 46 touchdowns. Let's also qualify the raw numbers a bit, and add in games played and yards per whatever. Spiller: 61 games, 5.1 yards/carry, 7.7 yards/catch, 23.1 yards/KR, 12.1 yards/PR Sayers: 50 games, 5.3 yards/carry, 12.7 yards/catch, 31.7 yards/KR, 14.5 yards/PR What we have here is an author using incredibly arbitrary cutoffs (what's special about 1,150 KR yards or 300 PR yards again?) to force an unfair/inaccurate "similarity" between two not-that-similar players. If you just look at players with at least 5,000 all-purpose yards in their first 4 years, Sayers comes in 4th and Spiller 81st. If you require a minimum of 4,000 yards from scrimmage to weed out return specialists, Sayers comes in 3rd and Spiller 46th. Listen, I don't want to give Bill's crusade/jihad too much ammunition here. Spiller is at least a good player, and looked like a great player in 2012. He doesn't have to be Gale Sayers to be worth keeping around. (And that's good, because he's NOT ANYWHERE CLOSE to Gale Sayers.) We don't need to pretend that he and Sayers are in some elite class by themselves to convince ourselves that Spiller is good. It's enough to just look at his 5.1 career yards/carry and breakaway speed, and chalk up last year's struggles to a combination of bereavement and injury. (He looked significantly slower when he came back from the high ankle sprain, and got caught from behind at least a couple times on what would've been TDs in 2012.) And by the way, 46th on that list, while not in any way in Sayers' class, is still pretty good. There's a few flameouts on the list, but it's mostly made up of good players, including (way above Spiller) almost every HOF running back.

Never heard of him, but not surprising they signed a DE. If we assume that Schwartz's D will be more of a pure 4-3 and less "multiple" than Pettine's (which Marrone seemed to confirm last time he spoke about it), then it's unlikely that Dareus or Kyle W. or Branch will be lining up at DE much. That leaves Mario W. and Hughes, and apparently Manny Lawson per Whaley's comments. If we accept that Lawson really is looked at as a base-package DE, that's still only 3 on the roster, which isn't even enough during the season, much less the offseason. Personally, I think Lawson will be cut in training camp, but we shall see. Obviously Wynn isn't setting anyone on fire, but from a pure numbers standpoint, they needed more at his position. I wouldn't be surprised to see a fairly high pick spent at DE as well, especially considering Hughes is going into the last year of his deal.

Most mocks I've seen have Detroit taking Evans if he's available. (Not that I think he will be -- doubt he gets past #7.)

Nah, think I'll go ahead and continue to have my own opinions, but thanks for the suggestion. Please let us know if there are any other topics we're not allowed to discuss or opinions we're not allowed to have.

No. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/W/WillMi04.htm He's had 2 good years (including his rookie year, which is pretty rare in WRs), 1 lost/injured year, and 1 healthy but bad year. Throw out the injury year, and he's caught either 63 or 65 passes every year. 964/996 yards in the good years, 771 in the bad. 11/9 TDs in the good years, 3 in the bad. During the good years, he's a good player no doubt, but much more of a #2 than a #1. Comparing his good years to Stevie's, Williams has a small edge on TDs and yards/reception, while Stevie has a small edge in yards and a decent-sized edge in catches. Stevie also wins on consistency, with 3 good years out of 4 once he got his opportunity.

I do share some of your concerns here, and agree that the worst scenario is something like 60-70 catches, 950-1100 yards, 6-8 TDs and another 6-10 record. Because at that point, he's just about worth his remaining contract, but unless EJ makes a major leap (and if we're 6-10 again, he hasn't), is it really beneficial to have 2 $7.5mil WRs who are pretty good but nothing special? On the other hand, and this is pure speculation, Williams' contract is very cheap this year, and cutting him at any point beyond this year would be a cap savings. I hope the Bills are willing to part ways with him at any point, including after a decent but unspectacular year. Maybe the Bills are still hoping Evans falls to them (not super likely he gets past TB, but you never know), and they look at Williams as a potential transitional starter while Evans takes his rookie lumps. (Or whomever they draft in the 2nd or 3rd or whatever.) Just in terms of straight value, Williams >>> 6th-rounder. In terms of the broader implications of this deal, I'm less enthusiastic, but there's still plenty of room for hopeful/positive interpretation.

Totally agree. I don't want "a" receiver at #9, I want Evans because I think he'll be an absolute stud and he seems to be a perfect fit for what EJ needs -- a big, physical outside threat who can catch inaccurate passes, and who can box out and outleap guys to still be a valid target even when covered. We have shifty/quick/fast guys who can try to get open with route running or pure speed, but 1.) they're not good enough to get WIDE open most of the time, and 2.) EJ isn't good enough (yet) to pull the trigger AND put the ball on the money when a guy is barely open. Even beyond that, most defenses in the NFL are pretty good, and don't really leave guys open all the time. You want to have a good passing attack, it greatly helps to have a guy who can just win one-on-one matchups. How many times in the Chan/Fitz era did we see Donald Jones or TJ Graham try to high-point the ball deep in single coverage and fail miserably? Turn even a quarter of those incompletions into catches and our passing game would be a lot better.