DrDawkinstein Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 I would have been happier with Robinson, Spence or Ragland at end of 1st and have an extra 2nd Another option would have been to roll dice on Jack at end of 1st, high risk/high reward with an eye on longer term if he needs micro-fracture Fair enough, I appreciate the answer, and it's a decent plan. But in my eyes, nothing youve outlined is that much better than what we got at 19. At least, not so much that it should be the difference between being excited or not. You're still adding to the Defense, you could make the spinning wheels argument that Ragland or Jack (who might not even play this year) just replaces Bradham. My point is, 6 of one, half dozen of the other. No major difference other than what you personally prefer. But it would still be the same from a team perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 @TBNSports 5 things to know about #Bills first-round pick @Shaq_Lawson90, from @TyDunne: http://bills.buffalonews.com/2016/04/28/5-things-know-first-round-pick-shaq-lawson/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 (edited) If anybody has doubts about the pick: 1) All of the mocks on NFL.com had him going at or earlier than when we picked (except that one had him going just one after us to the Jets). One had him going as high as three (as I recall). 2) Listen to the interview on GR of the Clemson play by play guy - in particular about what kind of kid Shaq is. Quick answer: Great kid. He also loves to play football. 3) Some here have questioned whether he can be a consistent pass rusher. The fact of the matter is that all the kid needs is 5 sacks and 15 tackles to equal Mario from last year. 4) The kid already is an upgrade over Mario given his attitude. He loves playing football (by all accounts), wants to play for the Bills and Rex, and will NOT go on strike like Mario did last year. 5) I have not done any kind of scientific analysis but is seems that a lot of people that are anti Rex also do not like this pick. Curious . . . . Edited April 29, 2016 by Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 5) I have not done any kind of scientific analysis but is seems that a lot of people that are anti Rex also do not like this pick. Curious . . . . i get the frustration of having to use a pick on a pass rusher here, and why that would tie to feelings about rex. though even if mario were here and playing well, adding a good talent to the rotation wouldnt have been terrible. fresh legs are a big advantage, and with a rookie contract you can ease a guy in with really specific packages. as is he will be a full time contributor and thats great too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 You can be the world's smartest man, but it doesn't matter if you come across as a jackass when you talk to others. No amount of expertise on a topic earns someone that right. What? Then explain to me how I've been running this #*&$ for over 5 years with just a tenuous grasp of the subject matter and nothing earned? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted April 29, 2016 Author Share Posted April 29, 2016 @TBNSports 5 things to know about #Bills first-round pick @Shaq_Lawson90, from @TyDunne: http://bills.buffalonews.com/2016/04/28/5-things-know-first-round-pick-shaq-lawson/ WTF, is he expecting a flood? If anybody has doubts about the pick: 5) I have not done any kind of scientific analysis but is seems that a lot of people that are anti Rex also do not like this pick. Curious . . . . I'm not a fan of the Brothers Ryan. I think that Lawson was a good pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 (edited) Sully -- "Bills play the Need Card with Lawson" Lmao Edited April 29, 2016 by YoloinOhio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted April 29, 2016 Author Share Posted April 29, 2016 Sully -- "Bills play the Need Card with Lawson" Lmao Other headlines he had at the ready: Bills reach for Bills ignore character in picking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 Sully -- "Bills play the Need Card with Lawson" Lmao omg, literally the exact opposite is true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atlbillsfan1975 Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 i get the frustration of having to use a pick on a pass rusher here, and why that would tie to feelings about rex. though even if mario were here and playing well, adding a good talent to the rotation wouldnt have been terrible. fresh legs are a big advantage, and with a rookie contract you can ease a guy in with really specific packages. as is he will be a full time contributor and thats great too. The savings alone for Lawson over Mario should help some people get over Mario's departure. This is a forward thinking move. Drafting what could be a very good player at a cheaper rate should mean the FO has more flexibility with Glenn and Gilmore. Not to mention if TT has a good year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 (edited) The savings alone for Lawson over Mario should help some people get over Mario's departure. This is a forward thinking move. Drafting what could be a very good player at a cheaper rate should mean the FO has more flexibility with Glenn and Gilmore. Not to mention if TT has a good year. right? i guess I'm confused as to why moving on from aging and expensive to replace with young, fresh and cheap (not to mention the intangibles) is genius and brilliant when teams like the pats do it, but the Bills do it and how dare we fill a need! We should never cut anyone and never have needs! I feel like it's the old bills who hang on to stars in decline just because they were stars, at one time, and are afraid we can't scout well enough to replace them so we overpay to keep them too long. Paying a guy like Mario affects whether you can pay the rest of the young core you actually want to build with. Edited April 29, 2016 by YoloinOhio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 I would have been happier with Robinson, Spence or Ragland at end of 1st and have an extra 2nd Another option would have been to roll dice on Jack at end of 1st, high risk/high reward with an eye on longer term if he needs micro-fracture Somebody has to offer a late first and another 2nd for that to be true... Every singe year people throw out these critiques like they were available options we passed up. Someone has to pay on the other side, Bills don't just get to say we are gonna take this and this from you and give you this and then make it so. Another team has to dance with us and be willing to pay the price. Its already been stated that the offers available were not good enough for them to pass on a guy they had ranked very high on their draft board. And the team linked to offering a trade up didn't have the assets you are asking for (Dallas already used their 1st round pick at #4 so we wouldn't have a late round 1st in the only rumored trade down offer we had). So you can say you would have been happier in some "what if" scenario that didn't exist, but it has no relevancy of what actually was an available choice to the Bills. Now to the original question he asked you: Who else would you have taken instead of Shaq at 19? Because your trade scenario isn't a valid answer because it was not a legit option as it involved a trade partner that didn't exist offering your proposed scenario...a late round first and an additional second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 right? i guess I'm confused as to why moving on from aging and expensive to replace with young, fresh and cheap (not to mention the intangibles) is genius and brilliant when teams like the pats do it, but the Bills do it and how dare we fill a need! We should never cut anyone and never have needs! I feel like it's the old bills who hang on to stars in decline just because they were stars, at one time, and are afraid we can't scout well enough to replace them so we overpay to keep them too long. Paying a guy like Mario affects whether you can pay the rest of the young core you actually want to build with. Its really amateurish to pick need even when it converges with BPA. Its like showing up on time to a party. No one does it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 right? i guess I'm confused as to why moving on from aging and expensive to replace with young, fresh and cheap (not to mention the intangibles) is genius and brilliant when teams like the pats do it, but the Bills do it and how dare we fill a need! We should never cut anyone and never have needs! I feel like it's the old bills who hang on to stars in decline just because they were stars, at one time, and are afraid we can't scout well enough to replace them so we overpay to keep them too long. Paying a guy like Mario affects whether you can pay the rest of the young core you actually want to build with. That's the point of the draft, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFunPolice Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 After hearing him on WGR and learning more about him I'm excited to see him on the field! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 The savings alone for Lawson over Mario should help some people get over Mario's departure. This is a forward thinking move. Drafting what could be a very good player at a cheaper rate should mean the FO has more flexibility with Glenn and Gilmore. Not to mention if TT has a good year. Stop with all this logic and reason, theres no place for it in rants about our first round pick lol. In all seriousness, its mind blowing how people don't seem to understand this. Its like they suddenly forgot how massive Mario's contract was and that keeping him meant creating MULTIPLE holes at other important positions. The dumbest part is whining that we used a 1st to fill a hole we created. Well guess what, had we kept Mario and lost multiple other players, we STILL would have used our 1st to fill a hole because of Mario, just would have been because we kept Mario and lost MORE players we had to find replacements for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 right? i guess I'm confused as to why moving on from aging and expensive to replace with young, fresh and cheap (not to mention the intangibles) is genius and brilliant when teams like the pats do it, but the Bills do it and how dare we fill a need! We should never cut anyone and never have needs! I feel like it's the old bills who hang on to stars in decline just because they were stars, at one time, and are afraid we can't scout well enough to replace them so we overpay to keep them too long. Paying a guy like Mario affects whether you can pay the rest of the young core you actually want to build with. Its a very Patriot-like move, and people here arent used to a FO that actually functions properly. Stop with all this logic and reason, theres no place for it in rants about our first round pick lol. In all seriousness, its mind blowing how people don't seem to understand this. Its like they suddenly forgot how massive Mario's contract was and that keeping him meant creating MULTIPLE holes at other important positions. The dumbest part is whining that we used a 1st to fill a hole we created. Well guess what, had we kept Mario and lost multiple other players, we STILL would have used our 1st to fill a hole because of Mario, just would have been because we kept Mario and lost MORE players we had to find replacements for. It's like people forget how the modern era NFL works, with it' CBA that established a salary cap and FA so players could move around, and there would be parity created by constant churn and a level spending limit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 right? i guess I'm confused as to why moving on from aging and expensive to replace with young, fresh and cheap (not to mention the intangibles) is genius and brilliant when teams like the pats do it, but the Bills do it and how dare we fill a need! We should never cut anyone and never have needs! I feel like it's the old bills who hang on to stars in decline just because they were stars, at one time, and are afraid we can't scout well enough to replace them so we overpay to keep them too long. Paying a guy like Mario affects whether you can pay the rest of the young core you actually want to build with. Regardless of his attitude, they had to dump Mario in order to keep the young stars, as you state. That move made replacing him the #1 need, which as many have stated, coincided with the BPA--the stars aligned! This doesn't make him a star, but in Ryan's D he is a talented, high-effort player who fits better than a disgruntled Mario. In Ryan's D, stopping the run is paramount, and pressure comes from everywhere. Shaq will set the edge as well as Mario, but most likely be more aggressive in tackling against the run. He will get his sacks, but I doubt he'll be a double-digit guy--Again, the sacks come from everywhere, so he will simply do his part. They still need an NT, and they also need KW's replacement, so they could go in that direction in R2. However, this pick can go in any direction, depending on how the round falls to them. A lot of DT talent left, but they could also use S and LB. If the Clemson CB is there, I wouldn't be surprised if they take him too. So many options... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince88 Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 Is it ok to coin the phrase "Shaq Attack"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 Is it ok to coin the phrase "Shaq Attack"? @buffalobills That moment when you find out you're the newest member of the Buffalo Bills. #ShaqAttack https://pbs.twimg.com/tweet_video/ChLSk5JWMAE5dbe.mp4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts