SuperKillerRobots

Las tiem we had a big snow storm here, I actually forgot to let the parking brake out when I drove to work and I couldn't understand why the car wanted to spin out everytime I turned the wheel.

Pot, meet Mr Kettle. So we shouldn't cut the LG without a backup plan, but to hell witht he top 3 DEs - bring back Al Wallace! That makes perfect sense.

Can some one clsoe the thread? This poster has said all that needs to be said.

Number 1 is the worst idea ever. We would trade a dominant left tackle for a dominant WR and lose 21 draft slots! Come on man, Peters has to fetch at least what Roy Williams got, if not more. No way Boldin is worth more than Peters.

It depends on one thing: When measuring these two players against each other, are we talking about LT just after he hit the crack pipe or maybe right before halftime or the end of the game when said crack hit was wearing off? The guy was an animal, but he also admitted to smoking crack right before kick off of at least one game. So cracked up LT is better than Bruce, but without uppers I say they were roughly the same given that, as another poster said, LT had a scheme designed around him to show off his talent while Bruce was put in a scheme that probably held him back statistically.

If they played with Stroud and Haynesworth in the middle, they would only need to play 10 on defense. Those two in the middle would make me look good at DE! Seriously though, if the Bills isgned Haynesworth, I think we could get another year out of Kelsey. In fact, if that were the trade off (get Haynesworth, but have to keep the same DEs), I would take it in a second.

Nice post. I think a lot of the 2006 FA/RFA signings/attempted signings and the talent tlevels associated with them has more to do witht eh state of the roster at that time than any talent evaluation. They were a terrible team at the end of 2005 with a ton of holes to fill. They signed a lot fo these mediocre to terrible FAs in hopes of fielding a team that could compete, not necessarily one that was going to win anything. A lot of those players were counted on to play big roles and most were pedestrian players at best for their former teams. I think the team was so bad that Marv just wanted bodies in here so they had options as far as who would make the roster. This poor FA class was supplemented with a pretty solid draft class and a good number of those draftees are still on the team today. As the years went on, they seemed to be more willing to pay more for players as evidenced by the OL in 2007 and the defense in 2008. I think history would say that when the Bills look like they could have a shot, Ralph has been known to pony up some dough for a good FA signing (not necessarily a huge splash, but a TKO type signing). In the end, I agree with your speculation about the FA this year as far as one big player, one moderate player, and a couple of low end players. I just think that the big ticket player will be a TKO-caliber signing (a top 5 or 10 FA).

I couldn't agree with that more.

Didn't he play against us in some bad weather and after the game said something about never playing in Buffalo if he had the choice?

The only way a CB makes sense in the 1st round is if said CB is 6'3", 265 lbs and can consistantly rush the passer from a 3 point stance.

I like Raji in the fiirst round with a Marv/Dick-esque 2nd round trade up to get Michael Johnson at the top of the 2nd, bottom of the 1st. This works perfectly for the Bills. Now if the football gods would just oblige this one time...

That's right Dean. Back in early 2006, we still had TKO, London Fletcher, Nate, no DTs at all (to the point where signing Larry Tripplett amounted to an upgrade), and that's just the defense! What about Mike Gandy, Benny Anderson, Mike Williams, and JP on offense!? That's just the players too. What about the abysmal rankings they had in each meaningful catagory? Back then they couldn't do anything expect get lucky. Now, though they lack a true identity, can at least do a few things right on a semi-consistant basis.

As I said in another post today, the defense has to be the priority this offseason. I don't think a TE is going to make the difference that a DE or DT or even an OLD would make, assuming they were all of the same caliber player. At this point, the Bills oculd probably get away with filling the TE position with a guy that primarily catches and use him in that fashion primarily. We played with fullbacks last year that didn't block anybody most of the time - why can't they put a TE in there that can't block anybody, but at least has a chance of catching a ball and going the distance. Especially if we could run away from his side of the field when running. Then he might wind up open on the play action. I don't see the need to have a guy who can do both well at this position ahead of the defensive needs. I also agree with the poster saying that some one will need to be cut if they add DEs. I would caution though that Kelsey might fetch a low round pick in trade - we've alrady paid the expensive part of his salary (he's only owed about $3mm per year over the next two). Coaches have commented on how he plays non-stop (i.e. high motor) and might be willing to take a flyer on him for a 5th or 6th round pick. He might not be the best player, but he is a leader (I guess), has starting experience at DE, and plays hard. Not saying that this trade will make or break the team for the next few years, but I think he could get something back.

You have to be optimistic at this time of the year. A lot of people were optimistic last year and for good reason up until week 7 and beyond. It's hard to look at this team and not be somewhat optimistic about their chances this upcoming year. They have good young players on offense, should have another top 5 special teams, and hopefully the defense improves to the point where they are not just serviceable, but actually can win a game here and there. I think you can chaulk up the first two fo Juaron's years as getting us out of the TD quagmire. Last year admittedly they should have done better, but they started out well and showed a lot of promise. The offense was certainly a problem through most of the second-half of last year, but with basically the same players from 2007 on offense, they were able to improve statistically. The offense should only need minor tweaking and some more time to get on the same page - they do have a 26 year old QB. The special teams will be fine. The defense to me is the real area needing an upgrade. Even though they added a lot last offseason, they are still not there. I think the defense has been the most needy of upgrading thoughout Juaron's tenure. They have upgraded, but they still haven't landed a difference-maker on that side. You could agrue that there are three or four difference-makers on offense (or at least difference-makers to be), while defense certainyl may have one or two of those, but not like the offense does. I maintain that the Bills are one or two difference-makers and one or two rotational guys away from having a dominant defense. This should be the year they try to go out and acquire that talant and those types of players.

I like the idea of Peppers (obviously), but if they get a top tier FA, I think it's going to be Dansby, not Peppers, but I'd love to be wrong on that.

I really like the idea of re-signing Greer and trying to trade McGee, but I think some of these trades are unrealistic for the Bills. McGee is a starting CB in the NFL. Despite what people here think of him, he will command a huge salary on the open market (not top CB money, but top 2nd tier). Were the Bills to trade him, I would think that the conversation starts at a low first rounder or at the least a high 2nd. I think trying to trade him striaght up for Gonzalaz or Winslow is a bad idea. This is a special situation for the Bills since they have a good player with a year left on his contract and enough depth behind him to entertain the idea of a trade. Doesn't happen too often and with a top 45 pick for him they could defintiely add some players to the DL.

I like where you ar egoing with this, but I still think they go DL in the first round. If they don't like a DE, then they'll take a DT. Unless the entire top of the draft is defense (which I doubt since there should be three OTs that go in the top 10 at least), I expect them to go DL. I wouldn't mind taking two DLs in the first 3 rounds and think it would be great if they got a DE and DT that could contribute. If not, a center would be a good choice at two. I don't like taking a RB at all unless it is really late and it would be stupid not to. I think they have to look at a FB this year since they should have a bit of flexibiltiy due to not having a ton of holes to fill. Good first post and welcome to the board!

OK, that's good enough for me. Let's sign this kid up. Maybe he'll pick on Kelsey - you know steal his lunch money, make fun of his mom, push him over a bench when he's not paying attention - in training camp until he runs home crying (or learns how to get after the QB).

I did too. I remember watching that thinking about how sweet it was going to be watching Stroud rip apart offensive lines all season. I think another semi-dominant to dominant big guy int he middle would open up everyone else - look how far it got Jacksonville when they had Stroud and Henderson. That defense had some good players, but it was mostly predicated off of those two dominating.

It would be great if they could get Raji - we need more guys on the DL, not necessarily at DE. This guy had something like 8 sacks last year. Imagine him next to Stroud. They might even make Kelsey look good...

Every team can always upgrade every position, since no team has all Pro Bowl starters. But a real GM, as you say, would realize that you cannot turn over 18 starters in an offseason and expect to gain any ground or even find upgrades at all the positions. GMs prioritize, like everyone dealing with limited resources. There are not enough good players total (including the draft) who change teams each offseason to field a full starting lineup, so I don't see why you would even think about turning over 18 players in one offseason. It makes sense to constantly look for upgrades at every position on the team (as the team says everytime it brings in some street FA for a workout durign the season. The reality is however that you will be lucky to significantly upgrade 2 or 3 positions in one offseason (not saying you won't have more new starters, but just that they won't necessarily be upgrades or impact players in the first year). With that in mind, you have to say: "What positions do we need to upgrade most to win?" and go from there. If the real answer is that the Bills need 18 new starters, then we are !@#$ed and should all root for a new team.

YES! McGee could turn into a 2nd round pick or possibly a low 1st - BJ Raji, pick 1, Michael Johnson, pick 2, Eric Wood pick 3. If they could just find a TE, they'd be fine.

Fight, new guys!

Of course - we need another guy on the roster who can play special teams. I don't understand why we need another mediocre WR. Right now we have evans, one or two mediocre guys, and two guys who will soon become mediocre WRs. Maybe they really do want to trade Parish.

That's the argument