Kiper's Draft Report and my conclusion

[Bflojohn]

Lurker, you're wrong! Ourlads mailed out on Wednesday, April 11th and I got it in the mail on the 14th! This actually is a little late for my liking, but the mock they did was dated April 8th (Sunday). So the information, which is for entertainment purposes to me, is realitively new!

Edited April 16, 2012 by Bflojohn

[voodoo poonani]

Show me that 99% miss rate. If there's anything I can't stand, it's those who throw out crap without facts to back it up.

 

It's simple statistics. The odds of selecting the the first round correctly out of just 50 prospects is greater than 1 in over 18 trillion.

[JPS]

When I read/hear guys like Mayock, Brandt, and Casserly say that Reiff can play either side, I believe them. There's a number of genius' on this board who must have put in more time than the above dudes....

 

Out of Reiff, Kuechly and Floyd, I trust the Bills' braintrust to pick the best one. I hope it's one of the 3, but who knows?! Could be Barron. What if they see him as Ed Reed. Or could be DeCastro. Fletcher Cox. So many possibilities.

[robertpaul49]

I prefer the older rankings than the more current mock drafts. Between Mike Williams, Maybin or Flowers, I cannot stand when the Bills draft someone who has suddenly risen up draft boards. I prefer to have someone who is not the hot pick. Someone who did it while their were playing games instead of running fast and the combines.

 

The other thing that bothers me is when the mock drafts focus on what they think the team will do instead of what the team should do.

 

Lastly, Nix said there were two or three tackles that could start on the left side right away. One is Kalil. It probably means that Reiff and Martin are the other two. If they need to find someone to play left tackle, they will not be able to wait till the second or the third round.

 

I have a strong feeling that this draft is going to be more like the Spiller draft than the Darius draft as far as the people on this boards reaction. Double head slaps!

[Bruce]

Reiff will not make it at LT in the NFL. Just say no.

 

Keuchly is not going to be the guy because they will wait till the later rounds to get LB's, later than the 2nd that is. Unless someone falls out of the first they had rated highly.

 

Floyd will be the guy if he is there @ #10, IMO. Kiper's analysis is contradictory on Floyd. He talks about the inconsistent QB play, which was wildly inconsistent, but then knocks Floyd for not being able to take over games at "key points"? Yeah, that makes sense. You have QB's who cannot read defenses and get the ball to the open man consistently, but it is the WR's fault he couldn't take over. Stupid. Floyd is a beast.

 

I also think that we have our eye on Kirkpatrick TBH. I wouldn't be surprised if he is the guy in the 1st. After that I think we wold go OT in the 2nd, LB in the 3rd, and maybe target a guy like Greg Childs in the 4th. I do think we get our LT in the 2nd-4th somewhere and not in the 1st. Guys like Bobbie Massie from Ole Miss or James Brown from Troy are two that seem to fit the mold to me. I also think that if Cordy Glenn somehow makes it to the 2nd Round we will be on the phones trying to move up to get him.

 

Depending on how the board falls, I take exception to Floyd at #1.

 

Lets not forget that Buddy cleared the decks, and IMO, signalled to the rest of the league that we are going LT (and rightfully so) with #1. What I mean is, we let Bell walk, and only have 1 player at the LT position. You need atleast 2 going into camp- preferably 3 for projects and injuries- we are left with only Hairston. Don't give me the Levitre garbage because he is solid and should stay at LG. We only have Hairston.

 

I don't see them whetting their chops for training camp fodder of LT contract casualties. They have to replenish the stock at LT, and after Bell left, you don't take a risk drafting a LT in the lower rounds when you have such a glaring hole staring you right in the face.

[sllib olaffub]

Depending on how the board falls, I take exception to Floyd at #1.

 

Lets not forget that Buddy cleared the decks, and IMO, signalled to the rest of the league that we are going LT (and rightfully so) with #1. What I mean is, we let Bell walk, and only have 1 player at the LT position. You need atleast 2 going into camp- preferably 3 for projects and injuries- we are left with only Hairston. Don't give me the Levitre garbage because he is solid and should stay at LG. We only have Hairston.

 

I don't see them whetting their chops for training camp fodder of LT contract casualties. They have to replenish the stock at LT, and after Bell left, you don't take a risk drafting a LT in the lower rounds when you have such a glaring hole staring you right in the face.

 

You make a pretty good point here - the Bills are so thin at LT they probably shouldn't wait to address that position past the first pick. But, just because they are thin at the position doesn't mean their hand is forced, when it comes to drafting in the first round. We've seen these Bills, after all, go into a season terribly short at various positions - O-line being one group. They've shown a real tenacity when it comes to throwing off convention, so anything is possible. I do believe, though, that LT will be the pick in round 1.

[Cheddar's Dad]

Depending on how the board falls, I take exception to Floyd at #1.

 

Lets not forget that Buddy cleared the decks, and IMO, signalled to the rest of the league that we are going LT (and rightfully so) with #1. What I mean is, we let Bell walk, and only have 1 player at the LT position. You need atleast 2 going into camp- preferably 3 for projects and injuries- we are left with only Hairston. Don't give me the Levitre garbage because he is solid and should stay at LG. We only have Hairston.

 

I don't see them whetting their chops for training camp fodder of LT contract casualties. They have to replenish the stock at LT, and after Bell left, you don't take a risk drafting a LT in the lower rounds when you have such a glaring hole staring you right in the face.

 

Absolutely right my friend. There are those who insist on Floyd forgetting that Buffalo no longer has Bell. If Hairston fails, what then? Floyd with his 4.45 speed or any stretch the field receiver will be negated if Buffalo cannot provide Fitz with enough time to throw. It's just that simple. Unless Chan is convinced that Hairston can be effective, LT becomes the immediate need that must be filled. If Buddy selects any other positional player other than LT, it means that Chan has a conviction about Hairston, or that he and Buddy are willing to take a huge risk, or both.

[uncle flap]

Absolutely right my friend. There are those who insist on Floyd forgetting that Buffalo no longer has Bell. If Hairston fails, what then? Floyd with his 4.45 speed or any stretch the field receiver will be negated if Buffalo cannot provide Fitz with enough time to throw. It's just that simple. Unless Chan is convinced that Hairston can be effective, LT becomes the immediate need that must be filled. If Buddy selects any other positional player other than LT, it means that Chan has a conviction about Hairston, or that he and Buddy are willing to take a huge risk, or both.

 

Or... they could think that the Tackles available at #10 are only marginally better than the Tackles likely available later. And that Floyd is way better than the rest of the WRs slated to go in later rounds.

[3rdand12]

Nix did say that there were tackles a plenty later and that the draft was thick with them. I dont think he feels that we HAVE to draft one at ten. i think we probably should have one by 42. The Bell thing changed the dynamic awfully and put alot of pressure on us.

So do we take for a position of need at #10? Because it really is one now. and even though the value comes into question?

Ps Cheddars Dad, i dont think Reiff will be a good pass blocker and thats what we needed and need on the left side. we ran well enough. But let me say that if we draft him or Martin or Glenn or Potter i am behind the FO all the way. we need to draft two tackles that project as LT's. damn that Bell!!

[Astrobot]

Love how every one thinks Reiff is a RT when he played LT and most annalists think he can play LT.

 

Here is a good read on Reiff. I'd be happy with the pick--unless Kuechly is passed up for Reiff.

http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2012/4/11/2941885/an-iowans-perspective-on-reiff

[BillsCelticsAngelsBama]

Yeah lets pick a RT 10th in rieff and wait til the 3rd round when theres no good receiver left if we want a true no.2 WR we will get one in the first or 2nd. Mcnutt toon jenkins childs all have major holes in there game thats why there considerd 3rd and 4th round picks, we need to go WR first or DEFENSE an then the other 2nd pick. We can get a better T later in the draft than martin/reiff/adams at 10

This year there are 25 WR's in the draft that could be stars and 3-5 tackles (at best) You're way off. Just say no to Floyd and yes to Reiff !!

 

Love how every one thinks Reiff is a RT when he played LT and most annalists think he can play LT.

I think one poster started this and it has been growing like a weed ever since. "Oh his short arms, blah, blah, blah". I predict Buddy will have his guy sprint to the podium if Reiff is still on the board at our pick.

 

Or... they could think that the Tackles available at #10 are only marginally better than the Tackles likely available later. And that Floyd is way better than the rest of the WRs slated to go in later rounds.

Or he could think just the opposite and let the "Buyer Beware" selection of Floyd fall to some other sucker.

Edited April 16, 2012 by MOVALLEYRANDY

[K-9]

Here is a good read on Reiff. I'd be happy with the pick--unless Kuechly is passed up for Reiff.

http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2012/4/11/2941885/an-iowans-perspective-on-reiff

 

Thanks for the link. While I can appreciate the perspective of an 'Iowan', I can't agree with anything the writer says. He goes from saying Reiff did a great job as an LT in college but if he ends up being an RT or even "quality depth" then he's worth it. Sorry. If he's selected as a starting left tackle and he ends up as anything but then he's a wasted pick at 10. We can find 'depth' guys in the later rounds. If he's not a sure thing then I say pass and grab a player that IS a sure thing. Or at least as sure as the Bills can be about any kid being a sure thing.

 

Give me a playmaker, regardless of position at 10 and I'll be happy.

 

Playmaker is ALWAYS a need position. Especially on teams that don't have a lot of them.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[Cheddar's Dad]

Ps Cheddars Dad, i dont think Reiff will be a good pass blocker and thats what we needed and need on the left side. we ran well enough. But let me say that if we draft him or Martin or Glenn or Potter i am behind the FO all the way. we need to draft two tackles that project as LT's. damn that Bell!!

 

I haven't seen any draft "expert" doubt that Reiff can be an effective pass blocker. The doubters seem to be posters to this site. Looking at Kiper's report and projecting who might be there if Buffalo passes on Reiff and selects a player at another position, The only player that looks like he could play LT is Jeff Allen (6-4, 307) a LT from Illinois. Martin and Adams figure to be selected between 20 and 32 and there is no guarantee that Allen will be there for Buffalo in the second. There might be a developmental type that could get experience at RT but Buffalo has Pears there and he played well last year. Would you want to see him replaced on occasion to give a kid experience? Failure to select Reiff, who all of the so called experts say is the second best LT in the draft, opens the possibility that, if Hairston, a player with very little experience, does not make it, the running game as well as the passing game will be in trouble.

[3rdand12]

Yes sir your last sentence really says it all.

ps i still dont think Rieff will handle speed rush from outside. and i sure dont mind a LT rotation if fitzy dont