KDIGGZ Posted May 6, 2016 Share Posted May 6, 2016 Would have cost too much is my guess to move that far. No they were planning to move that far but their target was Ragland not Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted May 6, 2016 Share Posted May 6, 2016 Just watched the video and 2 questions: Were the Bills not interested in Myles Jack? And, how long before Monos is nabbed to be a GM somewhere? 1 more season, the cheap Bills will promote from within after getting rid of that bum Whaley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atlbillsfan1975 Posted May 6, 2016 Share Posted May 6, 2016 I look at Washington as a look at the future. Meatballs career in in its sunset.......this was a strong draft for down linemen....the bills plucked one. I wonder if we are gonna look back at this draft in a couple of years and point to it as why Whaley is named GM of the year. - S. Lawson - stud - Ragland - enforcer - Washington - the new Meatball? We might pluck as many as 5 eventual key contributers out of this draft If we get 3 starters this year and 2 more develop into starters next year, then the Bills had a great draft. 5 starters from a draft is ideal. You need to hit on 2-3 starters in year one and then have 2-3 become starters in year 2 or 3. doing the math(and assuming 4 year rookie contracts) you would have 20 of your starters being guys drafted. That would be ideal, maybe not obtainable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Vader Posted May 6, 2016 Share Posted May 6, 2016 That was great to watch. This was a thrilling draft for the Bills, and I can't wait to see how these rookies look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 If we get 3 starters this year and 2 more develop into starters next year, then the Bills had a great draft. 5 starters from a draft is ideal. You need to hit on 2-3 starters in year one and then have 2-3 become starters in year 2 or 3. doing the math(and assuming 4 year rookie contracts) you would have 20 of your starters being guys drafted. That would be ideal, maybe not obtainable. You "need" to hit on 2-3 starters in year one, and get 5 starters from a draft?? I'm going to go out on a limb and say that is not "expected" but stupendous. I think most teams are thrilled if 3-4 of their draftees eventually become significant contributors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 You "need" to hit on 2-3 starters in year one, and get 5 starters from a draft?? I'm going to go out on a limb and say that is not "expected" but stupendous. I think most teams are thrilled if 3-4 of their draftees eventually become significant contributors. From a draft 2 starters and 2 significant role players is a good haul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincec Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 it's funny that our next guy jarran reed was taken with our 2nd round pick. I get the impression that he was more of a fall back than an equal to Ragland on the draft board. If not, then the Bills wasted some draft picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Gun Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 ON THE CLOCK - INSIDE THE DRAFT ROOM - HOW VALUE AND NEED ALIGNED FOR THE BILLS Bills Focus: Inside Buffalo's Draft Room (7:53) Bills tried to get a 3rd player with a 1st round grade Good stuff. Great video. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 I get the impression that he was more of a fall back than an equal to Ragland on the draft board. If not, then the Bills wasted some draft picks. Yep. While they had first round grades on (Lawson,) Ragland, and Reed, Ragland was higher and there was a real chance he would have been gone before 49. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atlbillsfan1975 Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 You "need" to hit on 2-3 starters in year one, and get 5 starters from a draft?? I'm going to go out on a limb and say that is not "expected" but stupendous. I think most teams are thrilled if 3-4 of their draftees eventually become significant contributors. Why not? Why can't a team do that? Finding 2-3 starters is not some insurmountable task. Have a few more that develop into starters with a year or two of practice, coaching, and training. I am betting that of players starting in the NFL something like 80% or greater were drafted. Use FA to fill in gaps and for rotational/ depth. To be a great franchise you need to draft great. that's where it starts for talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 Why not? Why can't a team do that? Finding 2-3 starters is not some insurmountable task. Have a few more that develop into starters with a year or two of practice, coaching, and training. I am betting that of players starting in the NFL something like 80% or greater were drafted. Use FA to fill in gaps and for rotational/ depth. To be a great franchise you need to draft great. that's where it starts for talent. I guess you haven't noticed that for the most part, draft picks are a crapshoot. Seriously -- look it up, Thurman. Your expectations for what teams should do in the draft are waaaaaay out of line. What you're looking for may happen once in a blue moon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 Folks can say what they want, but I don't get the impression Whaley is doing Rex's bidding...this seems to be a genuinely focused organization whose owners, GM, and coach are all working together and in the same direction. It's about time. bull ****. I saw Russ Brandon in the room & that's all I need to know that this draft sucked. this is my question too. They were more interested in Ragland than Jack, at least per the video though I'm sure it was edited. Still, they cheered when Jack went 5 picks before them. Maybe they just didn't want to trade up far enough to get him? Still, the cheers were interesting considering you would think they might hope he kept sliding to the Bears spot at 41 if they liked him. So you think Whaley is lying when he says that they started with Cleveland and worked their way down when looking for a R2 trade partner? They got the guy they wanted and those cheers were genuine expressions of that. They were just as pumped with Washington still being available as they were with both of their first two picks being available. They think he might end up being one of the steals of the draft. I don't know if I'd go that far but I will say that the handful of times I watched OSU this year, Adolphus Washington was all over the freaking place blowing shlt up. He's a talented player who, if motivated, will make an impact. It's up to Rex and staff. I'm curious to find out what weight they want him to maintain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 (edited) bull ****. I saw Russ Brandon in the room & that's all I need to know that this draft sucked. So you think Whaley is lying when he says that they started with Cleveland and worked their way down when looking for a R2 trade partner? They got the guy they wanted and those cheers were genuine expressions of that. He's a talented player who, if motivated, will make an impact. It's up to Rex and staff. I'm curious to find out what weight they want him to maintain. no I didn't mean to imply I thought he was lying or anything. I actually forgot he said that. So they had Ragland higher than Jack? Strictly medical or no? Because Jags say he is good to go right now. Just wondering. Edited May 7, 2016 by YoloinOhio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 Why not? Why can't a team do that? Finding 2-3 starters is not some insurmountable task. Have a few more that develop into starters with a year or two of practice, coaching, and training. I am betting that of players starting in the NFL something like 80% or greater were drafted. Use FA to fill in gaps and for rotational/ depth. To be a great franchise you need to draft great. that's where it starts for talent. 2-3 rookie starters and a couple more developing later on would be considered an AMAZING draft for any team. 5 solid players out of 7 picks?!? Those drafts are few and far between even for the best drafting teams. For some perspective, we didnt even get 5 starters out of the historic 1985 draft. And we had 14 picks across 12 rounds, and were sitting in the #1 overall position. A more realistic goal (but still a goal, not expectation) is 1-2 rookie starters, and 1 more developing down the line. The only expected players would be out of maybe the first 3 rounds. Anything past that is a crap shoot, and bonus if they develop. The other major part in all this is re-signing your guys that do develop, which Whaley and Co. have proven they will do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 no I didn't mean to imply I thought he was lying or anything. I actually forgot he said that. So they had Ragland higher than Jack? Strictly medical or no? Because Jags say he is good to go right now. Just wondering. I would guess medical. Jack too is a heck of a player & perhaps more immediate impact (WOW!!! stuff). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wiz Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 (edited) this is my question too. They were more interested in Ragland than Jack, at least per the video though I'm sure it was edited. Still, they cheered when Jack went 5 picks before them. Maybe they just didn't want to trade up far enough to get him? Still, the cheers were interesting considering you would think they might hope he kept sliding to the Bears spot at 41 if they liked him.I think they cheered because jags moved up and they were happy they didn't pick Reggie. I don't necessarily think that they had Jack rated lower than Reggie but could have been due to the injury. Edited May 7, 2016 by The Wiz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 I think they cheered because jags moved up and they were happy they didn't pick Reggie. I don't necessarily think that they had Jack rated lower than Reggie but could have been due to the injury. That's kinda how I saw it too. They probably had Reggie ranked higher due to injury and maybe even scheme fit. Rex needs that heavier, Bart Scott type of thumper to play his Will. They knew Jax wanted a LB, and were happy they took Jack instead of Ragland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris heff Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 What was Denver offering to move up in the first? Apparently not willing to part with next year's first, or did I miss something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atlbillsfan1975 Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 I guess you haven't noticed that for the most part, draft picks are a crapshoot. Seriously -- look it up, Thurman. Your expectations for what teams should do in the draft are waaaaaay out of line. What you're looking for may happen once in a blue moon. I love being condescended. Not sure what your background is but seing as you are on here as much as you are , you probably have about the same football knowledge as me.Go look up starters in NFL that were drafted vs UDFA. I am saying things have changed from now since 1985. Information that is available now vs then has drastically been improved. Expecting 4-5 eventual starters from a draft is not unreasonable, I think it will begin to be the norm in the next 5 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 I love being condescended. Not sure what your background is but seing as you are on here as much as you are , you probably have about the same football knowledge as me. Go look up starters in NFL that were drafted vs UDFA. I am saying things have changed from now since 1985. Information that is available now vs then has drastically been improved. Expecting 4-5 eventual starters from a draft is not unreasonable, I think it will begin to be the norm in the next 5 years. Perfect! Just the right amount of indignation & condescension to point out his condescension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts