klos63 Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 (edited) So it makes no sense and then you get it. C'mon. Anyway, to clarify for you... If our biggest need is offensive tackle and everyone knows our biggest need is offensive tackle and Robinson is somehow available, but... So is Sammy Watkins or Mike Evans ( this is to illustrate a point, I don't think that this is necessarily going to happen) and you pick Robinson, that would be "safe". Now if you instead pick one of the two receivers mentioned instead of Robinson because their happens to be some tackle in round five from some second rate college that your scouting department has convinced you can start, that would be a not "safe" move. Is that better? it's hypothetical and all but that's the type of situation I was eluding to. I was being sarcastic when I said that you are right in one aspect. It doesn't always come through in the written word. Drafting one of two franchise type WR in the draft would not be considered an unsafe pick. You're really stretching your argument with the reasoning being a round 5 pick from a second rate college will start at tackle - that boarders on ridiculous. You are trying to create a scenario that is so unlikely to occur it needn't be discussed. Basically you are saying, they probably won't do something obviously stupid, else they may make a bad impression on a prospective owner and lose their jobs. Yeah, you are on to something there. (that was sarcasm!). I think "playing it safe" could lead to Whaley/Marrone's departures, or at the very least accelerate it. If I was the new owner, and had witnessed to Bills FO pass on a playmaker like an Evans or Ebron (if they were on the board) to draft a RT like a Lewan (which would be the personification of the "safe bet" you speak of), I would be quite convinced that they didn't have the ball$ to undertake the measures necessary to field a winning team. A "safe" pick (and RT would be a safe pick) will not improve this team by leaps and bounds. Adding playmakers potentially could do exactly that. For those advocates of "power football" who think that RT is the wise move, based on the notion that the game is moving in that direction (because of the success of Seattle), I ask you one thing: can you name the starting RT for the Seahawks? And when you figure that out, the next question that should be answered is in what round was this RT drafted? Certainly not in the top 10. Who was the Bills' last "great" RT? Probably Howard Ballard- an eleventh round draft choice. Safe pick= Right Tackle. Right Tackle= another 6-10 season. Safe pick= Whaley and Marrone seeking new employment. Do you think Seattle won because of their Wide Receivers? I would think taking a WR who some are projecting at #2 would be an incredibly safe pick at #9(Watkins). Just because we may not be able to name the starting RT of Seattle, it doesn't decrease his value. I think the term 'safe' is inappropriate here. Is it a good pick or a bad pick, and that will be determined after the player actually plays some games. Edited April 23, 2014 by klos63 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOKBILLS Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 (edited) The more I think about it the more I am convincing myself that we won't see a shocking pick in the first round or two. Purely speculative but I believe Whaley & co. Will play it safe and not make a "spiller" type pick eg: surprise in a position where we are set. To me this means Tackle if Robinson or Matthews is available or Barr if the obvious top two defenders are gone. As much as I would love Evans size, our FO would have to answer to a new owner about making a luxury pick. I think picking Ebron would result in questions about chandlers contract and what they were thinking there.. It's year two for them so the pressure for results is already huge and with looming new ownership it may as well be year three. Thoughts? Evans a luxury pick? A 6-5 WR that had 2500 yds and 17 TD's in only 2 SEC seasons with a 10 ft catch radius is a luxury? Edited April 23, 2014 by KOKBILLS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJDK Posted April 23, 2014 Author Share Posted April 23, 2014 (edited) Evans a luxury pick? A 6-5 WR that had 2500 yds and 17 TD's in only 2 SEC seasons with a 10 ft catch radius is a luxury? Wow, seriously? Could you not understand the context? That pick COULD ABSOLUTELY BE MISCONSTRUED AS A LUXARY PICK BY A NEW OWNER, not me or us but by a new owner who would wonder why we didn't take a "sure thing" OT. These things happen a lot, basically GMs get fired for this type of thing OFTEN. I could have used a great many different examples and I guess I should have picked something easier to imagine for you. Repeat: I don't think it's a luxury pick. I actually would like the Bills to take Evans. I also think that if they take him with one of the top left tackles available (I don't think it's likely either) they could lose their jobs that much easier when a new owner comes in. In other words I'm speculating on how new ownership on the horizon may make them select differently In the draft Edited April 23, 2014 by SJDK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klos63 Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Wow, seriously? Could you not understand the context? That pick COULD ABSOLUTELY BE MISCONSTRUED AS A LUXARY PICK BY A NEW OWNER, not me or us but by a new owner who would wonder why we didn't take a "sure thing" OT. These things happen a lot, basically GMs get fired for this type of thing OFTEN. I could have used a great many different examples and I guess I should have picked something easier to imagine for you. Repeat: I don't think it's a luxury pick. I actually would like the Bills to take Evans. I also think that if they take him with one of the top left tackles available (I don't think it's likely either) they could lose their jobs that much easier when a new owner comes in. I would hope the new owner has a better understanding of the draft and the importance of the offensive line than you do. I doubt GM's get fired for making 'safe' picks, if that means building a great offensive line. They get fired for making bad picks. Picking a strong OT is never a bad thing to do. You can get all the great WR you can find but if you have a crappy offensive line, kiss the season goodbye. It's that simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJDK Posted April 23, 2014 Author Share Posted April 23, 2014 (edited) I would hope the new owner has a better understanding of the draft and the importance of the offensive line than you do. I doubt GM's get fired for making 'safe' picks, if that means building a great offensive line. They get fired for making bad picks. Picking a strong OT is never a bad thing to do. You can get all the great WR you can find but if you have a crappy offensive line, kiss the season goodbye. It's that simple. So now you've contradicted yourself. So which way do you draft from those two options? Edited April 23, 2014 by SJDK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klos63 Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 So now you've contradicted yourself. So which way do you draft from those two options? I don't believe I have contradicted myself, but my personal preference is OT. I think it's a higher priority than any other offensive position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOKBILLS Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Wow, seriously? Could you not understand the context? That pick COULD ABSOLUTELY BE MISCONSTRUED AS A LUXARY PICK BY A NEW OWNER, not me or us but by a new owner who would wonder why we didn't take a "sure thing" OT. These things happen a lot, basically GMs get fired for this type of thing OFTEN. I could have used a great many different examples and I guess I should have picked something easier to imagine for you. Repeat: I don't think it's a luxury pick. I actually would like the Bills to take Evans. I also think that if they take him with one of the top left tackles available (I don't think it's likely either) they could lose their jobs that much easier when a new owner comes in. In other words I'm speculating on how new ownership on the horizon may make them select differently In the draft First off...no offense...But there's rarely a context I don't understand...We're just going to have to disagree on the bolded text and move on...I simply don't see that happening...If the Bills win Whaley will have a great chance to stay...If they lose...not so much...It won't be dependent on this pick...Certainly not dependent on this pick alone... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFunPolice Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 I hate the term "luxury pick" What does that even mean? When I read it I see it as "We don't need an AMAZING superstar player! Just get us a right guard!" The concept of a "luxury pick" is absurd. You are NEVER worse off taking a potentially incredible football player. We have enough "lunch pail" guys. Average at best, hard working, nose to the grindstone guys are good to fill out your team, but you are not winning anything without elite talent on your team as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 This is one of the strangest threads that I have ever seen on here. "Would a new owner fire his staff because they selected a guy at a position of need (Watkins) with the 9th pick that was the 2nd ranked player in the draft?" What?!? Not to mention, this is being portrayed as some sort of risk. If it isn't a safe pick it has to be a risky pick. If you want to make a point that OL is safe and WR is risky you should have used a boom or bust guy like Kelvin Benjamin for the example. KOKBILLS covered it earlier but the record as well as the direction of the organization will determine who stays and who goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJDK Posted April 23, 2014 Author Share Posted April 23, 2014 (edited) This is one of the strangest threads that I have ever seen on here. "Would a new owner fire his staff because they selected a guy at a position of need (Watkins) with the 9th pick that was the 2nd ranked player in the draft?" What?!? Not to mention, this is being portrayed as some sort of risk. If it isn't a safe pick it has to be a risky pick. If you want to make a point that OL is safe and WR is risky you should have used a boom or bust guy like Kelvin Benjamin for the example. KOKBILLS covered it earlier but the record as well as the direction of the organization will determine who stays and who goes. So why did you have such a different response in the beginning of the thread Kirby? First off...no offense...But there's rarely a context I don't understand...We're just going to have to disagree on the bolded text and move on...I simply don't see that happening...If the Bills win Whaley will have a great chance to stay...If they lose...not so much...It won't be dependent on this pick...Certainly not dependent on this pick alone... Agreed but if we don't make the playoffs it's all in play. This is one of the strangest threads that I have ever seen on here. "Would a new owner fire his staff because they selected a guy at a position of need (Watkins) with the 9th pick that was the 2nd ranked player in the draft?" What?!? Not to mention, this is being portrayed as some sort of risk. If it isn't a safe pick it has to be a risky pick. If you want to make a point that OL is safe and WR is risky you should have used a boom or bust guy like Kelvin Benjamin for the example. KOKBILLS covered it earlier but the record as well as the direction of the organization will determine who stays and who goes. Except OL is a bigger need than WR, so it's riskier because of that. Obviously from the link above I'm not the only one who feels that the premise of this thread is a legitimate one. Say what you want about my examples but I stand by the fact that the offensive line is our most glaring need and if they don't address it successfully(wins/losses) this off season in the draft or free agency ( pretty much too late), a new owner will probably fire the Doug's. Edited April 23, 2014 by SJDK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 So why did you have such a different response in the beginning of the thread Kirby? Agreed but if we don't make the playoffs it's all in play. Except OL is a bigger need than WR, so it's riskier because of that. Obviously from the link above I'm not the only one who feels that the premise of this thread is a legitimate one. Say what you want about my examples but I stand by the fact that the offensive line is our most glaring need and if they don't address it successfully(wins/losses) this off season in the draft or free agency ( pretty much too late), a new owner will probably fire the Doug's. I thought that the thread was going to be about can a reach impact a new owners thoughts on the management? Would they view that as bold or careless? That is an interesting thought. When we start talking about guys valued much higher than where the Bills pick it doesn't make any sense. If the conversation moved to Ealy or Mosley or anyone that may be considered a reach at 9 it would have been interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewildrabbit Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 One of the (bad) results of an ownership change right now, could be a house-cleaning. I am not necessarily sold on Marrone (jury is still out for me), but I really like Whaley. I am not realistically expecting a Super Bowl win this year, but I think this team has enough talent, they should be, at the very least, in the playoff hunt for 14-15 weeks this season. Hell, they might even make it. If not, I might be a little more doubtful about Marrone. I want to see Whaley get a fair shot at the helm...for the first time since Tom Donohoe took over, I feel like the Bills are on the right track. I would hate for somebody to blow things up, just for the sake of making changes. I really like what Whaley did with the defense in the draft and in free agency last year, and again in free agency this year...for the defense. While the jury is still out on EJ, I think eventually he could be very good. As much as I like what Whaley did for the defense, I absolutely abhor what he did with the O line last year, and this year so far. It remains to be seen what he does in the draft tho, and he could really turn things around with this years draft. If the Bills enter the season with the status quo, and start losing again. Then I hope new ownership sweeps the org clean from Brandon to the ball boys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJDK Posted April 24, 2014 Author Share Posted April 24, 2014 I really like what Whaley did with the defense in the draft and in free agency last year, and again in free agency this year...for the defense. While the jury is still out on EJ, I think eventually he could be very good. As much as I like what Whaley did for the defense, I absolutely abhor what he did with the O line last year, and this year so far. It remains to be seen what he does in the draft tho, and he could really turn things around with this years draft. If the Bills enter the season with the status quo, and start losing again. Then I hope new ownership sweeps the org clean from Brandon to the ball boys. I like the whole staff also, but I think you are right on. I hope they would give this crew that third year though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts