SuperKillerRobots

So, if I third the motion, will it stop?

I wonder if we only need one of the two - either a big, physical WR or a pass-catching, big TE. If we took Jackson and got a big TE, then we might get the best of both worlds - uncoverable, tiny WRs and an uncoverable giant TE. (BTW, taking Jackson, in my opinion, would be a huge mistake - Harvey would be a much better option).

Good analysis Pyrite, that must have taken a while. I think you are dead on with the idea of having to draft impact players with the first day picks this year. Good teams seem to have more of a see what falls approach to the draft (of course this is a lot easier when you have a good team) and then fill in with FAs. I do disagree with some of your assessments however. For instance, I seriously doubt that there is a better #4 WR in the league than Josh Reed. Say what you want about him as a #1 or #2 but he is one of the top 15 in the league out of the slot (not including when starters line up there), as is Parish. The fact that neither of them can play the outside does not mean they are not good, just not at that position. I think the WR position should be looked at as two or three different positions instead of one. I also think tha tthe back up TE position is fine (with Royal) but the starter could be upgraded (same thing as I said with WR).

Not to make this a QB thing at all, but do you think that because of the potentially differing strengths of last year's starter and this year's starter, that the Bills might try to revampt the WR corps. It seems like with JP going into last season, they were content to have the more staight-line speed guys who could just go deep because the conventional wisdom at the time said that's what JP could do and did best. I wonder if more of a premium will be put on bigger receving targets with TE expected to start the season, since he likes to work the intermediate level of the field, as you say, and that really calls for a different pass-catcher.

I like it becuase I like the idea of defense first, but I'm not sure about Kelly. I would rather they be sure that they get a receiving target (note that I am not saying WR) that can come in and contribute right away in a short area (i.e. red zone). I could see this being either a TE or a WR. I think they have the flexibility to go with either a WR or TE in the first 3 rounds, provided the FO believes that guy will produce in the limited role enought o make a difference. Then go with more of a project guy later on. I was thinking more of going TE in round 2, leaving round 1 and 3 open for BPA.

Or at least steal your lunch money.

From the current regime: Tuten Re3yes (couldn't get rid of him quickly enough) Matt Bowen Peerless v2 Those are the biggest ones that haven't panned out. I personally feel like Guy had a worse record when TD was hear than afterward, which might mean that he had his hands tied by Hollywood D as far as personnel decisions. You have to remember, Guy's primary role is as a scout, not decision-maker. He has his picks for who should be signed, but he doesn't call it and he doesn't decide the budget. Both of those factors could greatly impact who the Bills target in FA and are completely out of his hands. The only player that really stunk, who was signed under his watch in the new regime, was Reyes, who was benched at mid-season in year one and didn't dress after that. It seems like the FO was more willing to go after older players under the previous regime than they are now. This might have something to do with his success rate. I would be willing to bet that, based on percentages, younger free agents (under 30) have a higher success rate than older ones (over 30) do.

That's a Winston Churchill quote paraphrased. He was giving a speach and a woman reporter asked him a question about being an alcoholic and a puiblic servant. To which he famously replied: "I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I will be sober and you will still be ugly."

I'm starting to think Sweed might be the best option at the WR position. I was more of a fan of Thomas before, but considering they want a guy who is gonna be ready to go as the 2nd WR this fall, Sweed sounds like the best bet.

Awesome... Elliot?

I like the idea of getting a proven CB, but I doubt that Shepherd is some one they would strongly consider. First of all, I think he wants a new contract, or will want a new contract soon. The FO didn't pay Clements (and I don't think they should have), who is about as good a player as Shepherd, so why would they pay this guy? Secondly, he is a classic man cover corner. He played very well in the Eagles blitz-happy system with the QBs getting a lot of pressure and him being left on an island most of the time. There are a few problems with this. Shepherd seems (in the limited time I've watched and from what I've read) like he's decent against the run and as a tackler, but really shines in coverage. CBs get paid a lot of money when they are good in coverage. We play in a defense that does not emphasize one-on-one situations where man cover corners really excel. We do need good and talented CBs, but we do not need the prototypical cover-corner (i.e. tall, fluid, athletic, fast). We need a guy who can tackle like a LB and play physical at the line. We can sacrafice speed in that position for more toughness. Lito just doesn't strike me as that guy. I love the trade-down idea, but would probably do it for a 2nd rounder instead of Lito.

I think they swapped 3rd rounders.

I was never that hgih on Limas Sweed (not that I had actually read that much about him either), but from the report on him from that site he definitely sounds like a "Bills guy". I can't see the Bills drafting a guy who has "immature", "moody", or "could take some time to absorb an NFL playbook". I like the sound of Sweed just because his skill set seems to be more complimentary to Evans as opposed to over-lapping. Not say that every WR should specialize in a specific area of the position, but I would liek to see the Bills get a guy who goes up to get balls, can beat press coverage at the line, will block in the run game, and has good hands. Of course I'd like him to be able to run after the catch and be fast as hell, but guys who cover all those areas usually go a lot higher than we pick in this draft. I like Thomas too, but I didn't like the comment about how he might need a year to learn a playbook. I don't think the Bills have the option of waiting a year on a new WR.

He's a good player, but not great and I think he wants a new contract (doesn't everybody?). I still think we get better at CB by adding a DE and drafting a CB later on in the draft and I know it's cheaper that way.

The un-capped year seems to be blown out of proportion. I think Peter King had a few paragraphs about it in MMQB this week. He also said that the top 8 teams that year would only be allowed to enter the free agent market after players from their team were signed and they could only signother players for the total dollar value that their own players were signed for by other teams. Teams would also have the ability to franchise one player and transition tag two players.

It seems like everone wants a big, physical WR in the draft so we can improve our red zone and 3rd down efficiency, as well as open things up for Lee to some degree. It has also been talked about how, generally speaking, WRs don't really contribute to a great degree until their second or third year. It seems like the qualities we are looking for in a WR could easily be found in a good TE prospect or a WR, depending on how you look at it. A TE can certainly help in the red zone and on 3rd downs and would be sent over the middle (or at least uup the seem) on a regular basis to take pressure off of Lee. Presumably it would also be a guy who could fight for tough balls and out-muscle DBs and out-run LBs. Given that there are more holes on this team than just the WR and TE positions, the fact that this is a deep WR class, and our offennsive needs (not necessarily our positional needs) why couldn't the Bills go with a strategy of targetting a TE with the 2nd rounder and just going with best player available in the first. They would still need a WR in the draft, but could wait on getting that WR until later on, since the chances are that the WR won't produce as quickly as the TE. In this way we get a nice option to take whoever we want in the 1st round (including a possible trade down) and still get to add the positions we need, while getting the most value out of our choices. with all of the talk about how long it takes WRs to develop and how there really aren't any sure-fire WRs in teh draft class, I just can't see the front office taking one with #11, in a year that is very important for everyone (not just the coaches), unless they are absolutely positive that that WR will be great.

I read an idea on here a while ago (it might have been lost) about WR prospects who are physical at the line and able to beat the jam consistenly at the college level are more apt to be productive right off the bat in the NFL. This makes sense since the majority of the time you see a rookie WR getting good production, it usually comes from the slot where there is less of a chance for a jam at the line. Does anyone have any good reports on the ability of the WRs in this draft class to beat a jam? Anyone agree with that idea?