RD 1, Pick 19: DE Shaq Lawson, Clemson University

[CommonCents]

@commonsence

 

I kinda did.

And it kinda got classified for me.

 

Whaley expects him to become a dominant type player. He doesn't care about the first four months of his career. If they missed on the pick when he comes back...flame away.

When you're in the business of accumulating talent, you take chances. EVERY team does. I promise they have a risk management or risk assessment system. Do I know this? No. But it's asinine to belive they were ignorant when making the pick.

I guess when we see what kind of player he is I'll make my judgmeng... on Lawson and Whaley both.

I wasn't bashing the pick or the logic behind it. The notion was being passed around that Shaq was playing at 70 percent for the past 3 seasons in college and that post surgery he is going to be even better. Shaq did make the comment in a fluff interview with Murphy...still it wouldn't make sense for him and Clemson to ignore an injury that was sapping his talent. I linked when the shoulder originally popped out 3 years ago from the teams website, he never missed a game or practice with it. He played at a high level with it and heading into the NCG any common observer was worried about his knee and never heard a whisper about his shoulder. The entire situation from date of injury until date of surgery is foggy, the Bills took a calculated risk let's see how it plays out. I actually like Shaq the injury sucks, but I find it odd some fans need to treat it as a blessing in disguise. If the young man can return to the field the same way he left it the time missed will be long forgotten.

 

Early in the draft process I coined Lawson the anti-Mario because of his effort level and passion he displays for the game. Check the history if you must!

Edited June 9, 2016 by Commonsense

[BillsBytheBay]

I wasn't bashing the pick or the logic behind it. The notion was being passed around that Shaq was playing at 70 percent for the past 3 seasons in college and that post surgery he is going to be even better. Shaq did make the comment in a fluff interview with Murphy...still it wouldn't make sense for him and Clemson to ignore an injury that was sapping his talent. I linked when the shoulder originally popped out 3 years ago from the teams website, he never missed a game or practice with it. He played at a high level with it and heading into the NCG any common observer was worried about his knee and never heard a whisper about his shoulder. The entire situation from date of injury until date of surgery is foggy, the Bills took a calculated risk let's see how it plays out. I actually like Shaq the injury sucks, but I find it odd some fans need to treat it as a blessing in disguise. If the young man can return to the field the same way he left it the time missed will be long forgotten.

 

Early in the draft process I coined Lawson the anti-Mario because of his effort level and passion he displays for the game. Check the history if you must!

Roger that. Thank you sir.

[Doc]

This is not even close to "major surgery," despite the time he'll be out. Please.

[FireChan]

I also think that the equation of losing some games from a rookie to injury is valid.....how can it not be? but is it any less then a rookie going down with an injury in training camp where they miss significant time? Does that pick also become less valuable due to the unforseen if they miss the same amount of games?

 

My point is this......lets say that Lawson misses.....say.....5 games....then he comes back....and he is sprinkled into the lineup splitting time with Manny Lawson.....he doesnt win rookie of the year.....but gets better and better with each game....by the end of the season being a actual playmaker...now lets get really kool aid and say that the bills win enough games to make the post season....and lets say by that time Shaq is really hitting his stride (while still spitting time with Manny Lawson)

 

In year 2 he takes over the starting spot....and makes the pro bowl in year 2

 

Does this make up for the percentage of missed games in year 1? I would think that it would.

Holy smokes John. What Bills drafted player has ever made the ProBowl year 2?

[Nanker]

This is not even close to "major surgery," despite the time he'll be out. Please.

Agreed. But I still pray that his spleen doesn't get infected.

[Beerball]

I do find it odd that Clemson didn't address this during an offseason. I'm not freaking out over it, but that seems curious. I wonder what that thinking was. I mean, there should have been plenty of time to get this taken care of without missing games.

Absolutely.

[NoSaint]

The criticism of picking a player who had a high chance of missing part or all of his first season due to a pre-existing injury is valid. Some models of draft pick valuation consider the cost savings of a player on a rookie contract versus what an equivalent veteran would cost. The value portion of those contracts is for 4 seasons. The Bills are going to lose a portion of that value with Lawson, probably close to one full season - or 25% of his rookie contract value. He was at the end of the pick band that I had him in so I can't really give a bump for value at 19. Lawson at 19 is a mistake from that point of view.

 

But those models use averages and variances. About 50% of the 1st round picks in this draft (every draft) will bust. So to your point, nobody will care about this missed season if he's a long terms stud for the Bills. I really liked Lawson as a player (injury aside) so I personally like his chances long term. We are all rooting for him to work out and become a difference maker. It is not fair to criticize Lawson for this situation or call him out as a bust. But the people and processes that led to taking him with a torn labrum at 19 do deserve scrutiny because even if they get away with it this time this kind of mismanagement will lead to problems at some point.

really, you hit the important part in the second half -- in the first round everyone gets hung up on need, and value and.... ultimately the biggest thing is are you on the right side of getting a productive player.

 

most will miss games in their first 5 years. most will have learning curves. but did your guy get to where you expected him to or not over the course of the contract?

[BADOLBILZ]

really, you hit the important part in the second half -- in the first round everyone gets hung up on need, and value and.... ultimately the biggest thing is are you on the right side of getting a productive player.

 

 

 

I disagree completely that "ultimately the biggest thing is getting a productive player" in round one.

 

IMO round one is where you need to pursue high impact talents............productive is not enough.

 

Productive is somebody else's free agent that you sign because you have a hole to fill and his drafting team didn't think he was worth the 5th year option because they found another one just like him in the 4th round a year earlier.

[John from Riverside]

 

 

I disagree completely that "ultimately the biggest thing is getting a productive player" in round one.

 

IMO round one is where you need to pursue high impact talents............productive is not enough.

 

Productive is somebody else's free agent that you sign because you have a hole to fill and his drafting team didn't think he was worth the 5th year option because they found another one just like him in the 4th round a year earlier.

I think we are just mincing words....."productive player"......."high impact talent"

 

What do you look for in a high impact talent?

 

- a 10 sack a year guy?

- a guy that opposing offenses game plan for each weak?

- a guy that makes everyone around him better?

 

Since we have pretty much all said that the pro bowl has turned into a dog and pony show.....what now becomes the litmas test?

[Augie]

Well, the good news is they gave us something to talk about for months. We're the big winners on that!

[Hapless Bills Fan]

I still don't understand that basis for this argument. Do you have evidence that he was overlooked? His "drop" seemed to be from Bears @ 11 (who moved up to get Floyd) to Bills @ 19. In between a multiple tackles were selected by teams that didn't have an OLB or DE need. Yes we scooped him up at 19 so its hard to say how far he would've dropped, but I am not convinced he dropped far.

 

Aren't you making the implicit assumption that the teams drafting above 19 were all drafting for "need" and passed over Lawson because he didn't fit their need, not because he occupied a slot on their draft board that was influenced by his shoulder? I thought the consensus these days was that teams drafted BPA.

[John from Riverside]

 

Aren't you making the implicit assumption that the teams drafting above 19 were all drafting for "need" and passed over Lawson because he didn't fit their need, not because he occupied a slot on their draft board that was influenced by his shoulder? I thought the consensus these days was that teams drafted BPA.

I will tell you what will be interesting

 

If in the long run Shaq ends up being the better player then Floyd......Floyd doesnt have much sand in his pants.....Shaq is more complete.

[3rdand12]

Any surgery that happens to "ME".

HAA !

Darn tootin'

[3rdand12]

I still don't understand that basis for this argument. Do you have evidence that he was overlooked? His "drop" seemed to be from Bears @ 11 (who moved up to get Floyd) to Bills @ 19. In between a multiple tackles were selected by teams that didn't have an OLB or DE need. Yes we scooped him up at 19 so its hard to say how far he would've dropped, but I am not convinced he dropped far.

So you make a strong point, but I can still see Lawson having value @ 19 with THIS injury. Obviously Jack and Smith had much more concerning injuries which is why they went so much later. If Shaq's knee were a problem still, then he would've dropped as well. I think the odds are better than an inside straight. Can we say a two pair drawing on full house (I don't think this injury takes him out of the hand like missing on an inside straight does)?

 

Its definitely possible the FO fed us some baloney but I'm a little skeptical. Either way I can understand the criticism. My biggest issue/concern was the 3 week delay. They really had better have believed he could play otherwise they ARE idiots.

This is an interesting comment. I agree completely.

I question the ones who were evaluating him at that point don't I. ?

And they would become the Idiots would they not ?

 

someone diccked this up.

 

I find it very hard to believe that Bills planned to not have a starter at 19. Who would become and impact player immediately AND long term.

 

Some one at OBD is an Idiot. just not sure who or how many.

 

[YattaOkasan]

 

Aren't you making the implicit assumption that the teams drafting above 19 were all drafting for "need" and passed over Lawson because he didn't fit their need, not because he occupied a slot on their draft board that was influenced by his shoulder? I thought the consensus these days was that teams drafted BPA.

I am making that assumption. But I think most agree that need is a consideration during the draft. So small drop yes but its description has felt like the sky was falling.

 

This is an interesting comment. I agree completely.

I question the ones who were evaluating him at that point don't I. ?

And they would become the Idiots would they not ?

 

someone diccked this up.

 

I find it very hard to believe that Bills planned to not have a starter at 19. Who would become and impact player immediately AND long term.

 

Some one at OBD is an Idiot. just not sure who or how many.

 

I can forgive someone making a wrong call or a risk didn't pan out. It would suck but sometimes those things happen. However, if you know hes going to miss time then say he'll miss time and get the surgery done 3 weeks earlier. I couldn't forgive having him miss 3 weeks just to look good.

[Bookie Man]

It's like a poker player drawing to an inside straight. Sure, sometimes it works out, but it's never a smart play and if he does it often enough it'll cost him.

I'd say it is more like a craps player betting on the come.

[John from Riverside]

What is done is done......I just want to see what kind of player we have when he gets back

[Buffalo Barbarian]

What is done is done......I just want to see what kind of player we have when he gets back

 

pretty much. Don't know what everyone is freaking out about, injuries happen, he's not going to make or break the season.

[thebandit27]

Don't think anyone's "freaking out".

 

But it sure doesn't look good on the organization. Reeks of incompetence.

I'm sorry, but no, it doesn't

 

Strip all of the chest-thumping away, and what you've got is a team that took a player that they believe will be a stud long-term, and did so knowing that at some point he'd have to have the surgery. They decided he was a good enough player that they were willing to deal with the surgery at some point in the future.

[JohnC]

Don't think anyone's "freaking out".

 

But it sure doesn't look good on the organization. Reeks of incompetence.

How does it indicate incompetence? The organization (as did every team in the NFL) was aware of his shoulder problem and the probable need to address it through surgery some time in the future. It just so happened that during an OTA session he felt pain in the shoulder area so the team decided to structurally fix the problem sooner rather than later. That was the smart thing to do.

 

The team drafted a player who they rated very highly. The exhibition of incompetence would have been for the team tobypass on a player who was a versatile lineman who fit their scheme because there was a delay in him getting on the field in his inaugural year.

 

Any GM in the league who refused to select a more talented player for a less talented player because of a delay in getting on the field in the player's rookie year should be fired for incompetence and a lack of perspective. The GM, more than anyone else in the organization, has to take a wider perspective in roster building. To do otherwise is an act of short term expediency and an act lacking in wisdom.