Using a 1st Rd pick on a CB/S is a waste of pick

[Jerry Jabber]

IMO, the Bills wasted too many first round draft picks on CB’s over the years as they are very rarely resigned (Winfield, Clements, Gilmore). If a first round CB does well in his rookie contract, his next one is usually too high for the Bills to keep him, so the way I look at it, it’s a wasted pick as that CB will be only on the team for five years, vice taking a player that has more of an opportunity to stay on the team longer than his rookie deal. First round picks should be used on players that are impact players as well as being on your team for 8-10 years (or more), so it would make more sense to draft a CB in the lower rounds. Constantly replacing DB's every four to five years is a terrible move. I highly doubt T. White will be resigned after his rookie deal ends, so the Bills will have to go through this again in four to five years. When will they ever learn?

Edited April 28, 2017 by Jerry Jabber

[Chilly]

Since I was curious, I took a look at # of CBs drafted in the 1st round by team since 1999:

 

[26CornerBlitz]

IMO, the Bills wasted too many first round draft picks on CB’s over the years as they are very rarely resigned (Winfield, Clements, Gilmore). If a first round CB does well in his rookie contract, his next one is usually too high for the Bills to keep him, so the way I look at it, it’s a wasted pick as that CB will be only on the team for five years, vice taking a player that has more of an opportunity to stay on the team longer than his rookie deal. First round picks should be used on players that are impact players as well as being on your team for 8-10 years (or more), so it would make more sense to draft a CB in the lower rounds. Constantly replacing DB's every four to five years is a terrible move. I highly doubt T. White will be resigned after his rookie deal ends, so the Bills will have to go through this again in four to five years. When will they ever learn?

 

Seems as if you're resigned to this way of thinking.

[Samwell Tarly]

Only if he's no good. Even if you only get 1 contract out of him it's better than a bust or career ended by injuries.

[Jerry Jabber]

Only if he's no good. Even if you only get 1 contract out of him it's better than a bust or career ended by injuries.

 

That is a good point. We all know not every pick is going to pan out, but teams have to be able to build around players. When you're constantly replacing first round draft picks every four to five years because you're either drafting DB's and RB's, you're creating more holes on your team instead of making your team better.

[buffalopdc]

5 years is an long career in the NFL. If we get a guy that plays well through a rookie contract that a huge win for a team. The upside of this pick in my opinion is that you get a player potentially on par with Gilmore for a lot less money. Also the fact that we picked him up late in the first the rookie wage for him is reasonable. There is only so much cap to go around and Gilmore was just too heavy of a cap hit.

Edited April 28, 2017 by buffalopdc

[Jerry Jabber]

5 years is an long career in the NFL. If we get a guy that plays well through a rookie contract that a huge win for a team. The upside of this pick in my opinion is that you get a player potentially on par with Gilmore for a lot less money. Also the fact that we picked him up late in the first the rookie wage for him is reasonable. There is only so much cap to go around and Gilmore was just too heavy of a cap hit.

 

I thought using a first rounder on Gilmore was potentially a waste as he most likely would leave for big money, which in fact he did. You can get good DB's in the lower rounds (3-7), why waste a first on a guy that's most likely going to be around for a short time? Guys like Wood and Dareus have been around for a while now and they were first round picks. I'd rather see first round picks used on positions such as QB, DE, OT, LB, WR (just as long as he's not a small speed guy like Parrish, Price etc...). DB's are overvalued in the NFL.

Edited April 28, 2017 by Jerry Jabber

[Alphadawg7]

IMO, the Bills wasted too many first round draft picks on CB’s over the years as they are very rarely resigned (Winfield, Clements, Gilmore). If a first round CB does well in his rookie contract, his next one is usually too high for the Bills to keep him, so the way I look at it, it’s a wasted pick as that CB will be only on the team for five years, vice taking a player that has more of an opportunity to stay on the team longer than his rookie deal. First round picks should be used on players that are impact players as well as being on your team for 8-10 years (or more), so it would make more sense to draft a CB in the lower rounds. Constantly replacing DB's every four to five years is a terrible move. I highly doubt T. White will be resigned after his rookie deal ends, so the Bills will have to go through this again in four to five years. When will they ever learn?

 

Come on man...Winfield and Clements were 15 and 12 years ago. It has literally nothing to do with this team. Not same owners, not same FO, not same philosophy, not same coaches, not same roster. I mean it has ZERO to do with anything we just did.

 

More importantly, he also missing all the context of what really happened. I mean Nate Clements became the highest paid defensive player in NFL history at that time when he left here, and he wasn't worth it. In fact, he never came close to living up to that value of that contract. That is why we didn't pay him, not because he is a DB, but because he was grossly over paid and not worth the contract. Same with Gilmore...he got a contract that out weighed his performance. They had been trying to resign him, but he wanted to be over paid. So they made the CORRECT choice and let him walk. In exchange we signed multiple other players like Hyde with the cap room saved, picked up an extra first rounder and extra 3rd rounder, and drafted a top prospect to replace him who looks like a leader and can actually make a tackle too. Not to mention, Gilmore struggles to stay healthy.

 

So this isn't a draft em and don't resign em philosophy just because we didn't resign ones 15 years ago and then avoided over paying one this offseason. Its about making the correct decision at the time they become FA's regardless of the player. Like when Byrd got over paid and was an awful signing by the Saints.

[BringBackOrton]

Letting Gilmore walk and drafting White stings, like many said it would.

[Alphadawg7]

Letting Gilmore walk and drafting White stings, like many said it would.

 

So you prefer to have Gilmore instead of guys we signed like Hyde with his cap room savings along with White, an extra first, and an extra 3rd? I mean we have a lot instead of Gilmore right now and his over paid contract. I would prefer White and Hyde over Gilmore...and thats before I factor in the extra 1st and 3rd and the other players we signed with the cap room from not over paying Gilmore.

[Jerry Jabber]

 

Come on man...Winfield and Clements were 15 and 12 years ago. It has literally nothing to do with this team. Not same owners, not same FO, not same philosophy, not same coaches, not same roster. I mean it has ZERO to do with anything we just did.

 

More importantly, he also missing all the context of what really happened. I mean Nate Clements became the highest paid defensive player in NFL history at that time when he left here, and he wasn't worth it. In fact, he never came close to living up to that value of that contract. That is why we didn't pay him, not because he is a DB, but because he was grossly over paid and not worth the contract. Same with Gilmore...he got a contract that out weighed his performance. They had been trying to resign him, but he wanted to be over paid. So they made the CORRECT choice and let him walk. In exchange we signed multiple other players like Hyde with the cap room saved, picked up an extra first rounder and extra 3rd rounder, and drafted a top prospect to replace him who looks like a leader and can actually make a tackle too. Not to mention, Gilmore struggles to stay healthy.

 

So this isn't a draft em and don't resign em philosophy just because we didn't resign ones 15 years ago and then avoided over paying one this offseason. Its about making the correct decision at the time they become FA's regardless of the player. Like when Byrd got over paid and was an awful signing by the Saints.

"Come on man...Winfield and Clements were 15 and 12 years ago. It has literally nothing to do with this team. Not same owners, not same FO, not same philosophy, not same coaches, not same roster. I mean it has ZERO to do with anything we just did." If you're referring to trading back in the draft to gain more picks, I applaud the move and it's a move I felt the team should have made even before the draft. http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/193251-should-the-bills-move-back-in-the-draft-to-stockpile-picks/ But I'm referring to using a first rounder on DB's and apparently nothing has changed over the years.

 

 

"I mean Nate Clements became the highest paid defensive player in NFL history at that time when he left here, and he wasn't worth it. In fact, he never came close to living up to that value of that contract. That is why we didn't pay him, not because he is a DB, but because he was grossly over paid and not worth the contract. Same with Gilmore...he got a contract that out weighed his performance." That's part of my argument, DB's command big money after their rookie deals, so that's another reason why it's not a smart move to use a high pick on one. DB's and RB's should be taken in the lower rounds as those guys command more money after their rookie deals and have a shorter playing career. I thought using a first rounder on Gilmore was potentially a waste as he most likely would leave for big money, which in fact he did. You can get good DB's in the lower rounds (3-7), why waste a first on a guy that's most likely going to be around for a short time? Guys like Wood and Dareus have been around for a while now and they were first round picks. I'd rather see first round picks used on positions such as QB, DE, OT, LB, WR (just as long as he's not a small speed guy like Parrish, Price etc...). DB's are overvalued in the NFL.

 

"Like when Byrd got over paid and was an awful signing by the Saints." Byrd was replaced by a fourth rounder [searcy], so it didn't require a first or second rounder to replace him. First round picks should not be as expendable as the Bills have made them out to be. You can't build a solid foundation when you're constantly going through your top draft picks every four to five years, it's a waste and it's gotten the Bills nowhere except an average of 6-10 over the past 17 years.

Edited April 28, 2017 by Jerry Jabber

[BringBackOrton]

 

So you prefer to have Gilmore instead of guys we signed like Hyde with his cap room savings along with White, an extra first, and an extra 3rd? I mean we have a lot instead of Gilmore right now and his over paid contract. I would prefer White and Hyde over Gilmore...and thats before I factor in the extra 1st and 3rd and the other players we signed with the cap room from not over paying Gilmore.

We could've afforded Hyde and Gilmore.

 

And I would have rather had a QB. But White has nothing to do with the trade.

Edited April 28, 2017 by jmc12290

[Big C]

We could've afforded Hyde and Gilmore.

 

And I would have rather had a QB. But White has nothing to do with the trade.

 

White has much to do with the trade. And tell me, how would you feel if we stayed at 10 and picked Lattimore instead, which reports have said was the plan until the trade went through?

[The Frankish Reich]

Using a high pick on a CB is generally smart because good free agent CBs are ridiculously expensive (see Gilmore). Safeties? Not so much.

[jr1]

he's a dynamic punt returner. I'm not upset with the pick

[John from Riverside]

IMO, the Bills wasted too many first round draft picks on CB’s over the years as they are very rarely resigned (Winfield, Clements, Gilmore). If a first round CB does well in his rookie contract, his next one is usually too high for the Bills to keep him, so the way I look at it, it’s a wasted pick as that CB will be only on the team for five years, vice taking a player that has more of an opportunity to stay on the team longer than his rookie deal. First round picks should be used on players that are impact players as well as being on your team for 8-10 years (or more), so it would make more sense to draft a CB in the lower rounds. Constantly replacing DB's every four to five years is a terrible move. I highly doubt T. White will be resigned after his rookie deal ends, so the Bills will have to go through this again in four to five years. When will they ever learn?

Follow the money

 

How much did Gilmore sign for again?

[njbuff]

I am not worried about who the Bills draft in the first round.

 

They need to make their hay the rest of this draft. FOR ONCE.

[ndirish1978]

This couldn't have been a post in the draft thread? It really needed it's own special thread?

[Dark]

So the gist of your argument is:

• Good corners are valued and often overpaid after their rookie contract so it is a bad idea to get talented corners in the first round of the draft and pay them less for their most productive years?
• Cornerbacks are overrated, yet teams commonly overpay for them in a league that has heavily shifted toward a pass heavy philosophy?
• We have the best quarterback in perhaps the history of the NFL in our division and we should patchwork our secondary with late round picks?

 

Gotcha.

[Cash]

 

Come on man...Winfield and Clements were 15 and 12 years ago. It has literally nothing to do with this team. Not same owners, not same FO, not same philosophy, not same coaches, not same roster. I mean it has ZERO to do with anything we just did.

 

More importantly, he also missing all the context of what really happened. I mean Nate Clements became the highest paid defensive player in NFL history at that time when he left here, and he wasn't worth it. In fact, he never came close to living up to that value of that contract. That is why we didn't pay him, not because he is a DB, but because he was grossly over paid and not worth the contract. Same with Gilmore...he got a contract that out weighed his performance. They had been trying to resign him, but he wanted to be over paid. So they made the CORRECT choice and let him walk. In exchange we signed multiple other players like Hyde with the cap room saved, picked up an extra first rounder and extra 3rd rounder, and drafted a top prospect to replace him who looks like a leader and can actually make a tackle too. Not to mention, Gilmore struggles to stay healthy.

 

So this isn't a draft em and don't resign em philosophy just because we didn't resign ones 15 years ago and then avoided over paying one this offseason. Its about making the correct decision at the time they become FA's regardless of the player. Like when Byrd got over paid and was an awful signing by the Saints.

 

I think a lot of this actually serves the OP's argument. When you look at each move in and of itself, almost every move is a good one:

 

• Draft Winfield - good player
• Draft Clements - good player
• Let Winfield walk - (this one was a mistake - matching or beating his Vikings contract wouldn't have broken the bank and he remained really good for Minny)
• Let Clements walk - the right call; he wasn't worth that contract
• Draft McKelvin - seemed like a good idea at the time, but while he wasn't a total bust, you'd want better out of that high a pick
• Re-sign McKelvin - didn't have much outside interest and signed for pretty low money for a starting CB
• Cut McKelvin - his performance tailed off, starting to lose his athleticism, and maybe didn't buy in to the new scheme
• Draft Gilmore - good player (debatable how good)
• Let Gilmore walk - probably not worth that contract (I think he won't be, but time will tell)
• Draft White - seems like a good player from what I've read

But for all of that, we've stayed a middling to bad team for the entire time. Even though most of those individual moves were good decisions, they didn't lead to overall success. And that's what concerns me.

 

I get the logic of "CBs are expensive, so it makes some sense to draft good ones high, get good play on a cheap rookie deal, then let them walk and replace with another high pick." But I think that approach would work much better for an established playoff team with most of its foundational players in place. For a team like ours that's been perpetually rebuilding, I would much prefer we use our high picks to try to get (and keep!) those foundational players. Even the Maybin pick, as bad as it was, at least had potential - if Maybin had been a good player, we likely would've re-signed him to a big bucks deal, and we'd have had a stud pass rusher DE for 10 years or so.

 

Not every high pick will pan out. Some will be total busts like Maybin, some will be absolute studs like Jim Kelly or Bruce Smith, but most will fall into 2 broad categories: Okay-but-disappointing players like McKelvin or Whitner, or pretty-good-but-not-stars like Eric Wood or Gilmore. I think it's important when looking at overall team building to value some positions more than others in the high rounds. Because if you're not going to be willing to pay a "pretty good" CB when his contract is up, but will pay a "pretty good" LT, the LT is worth more in the long run.

 

I do agree that it's not entirely fair to judge this front office on the actions of previous front offices, but I also think there's legit cause for concern here.

[Alphadawg7]

 

I think a lot of this actually serves the OP's argument. When you look at each move in and of itself, almost every move is a good one:

 

• Draft Winfield - good player
• Draft Clements - good player
• Let Winfield walk - (this one was a mistake - matching or beating his Vikings contract wouldn't have broken the bank and he remained really good for Minny)
• Let Clements walk - the right call; he wasn't worth that contract
• Draft McKelvin - seemed like a good idea at the time, but while he wasn't a total bust, you'd want better out of that high a pick
• Re-sign McKelvin - didn't have much outside interest and signed for pretty low money for a starting CB
• Cut McKelvin - his performance tailed off, starting to lose his athleticism, and maybe didn't buy in to the new scheme
• Draft Gilmore - good player (debatable how good)
• Let Gilmore walk - probably not worth that contract (I think he won't be, but time will tell)
• Draft White - seems like a good player from what I've read

But for all of that, we've stayed a middling to bad team for the entire time. Even though most of those individual moves were good decisions, they didn't lead to overall success. And that's what concerns me.

 

I get the logic of "CBs are expensive, so it makes some sense to draft good ones high, get good play on a cheap rookie deal, then let them walk and replace with another high pick." But I think that approach would work much better for an established playoff team with most of its foundational players in place. For a team like ours that's been perpetually rebuilding, I would much prefer we use our high picks to try to get (and keep!) those foundational players. Even the Maybin pick, as bad as it was, at least had potential - if Maybin had been a good player, we likely would've re-signed him to a big bucks deal, and we'd have had a stud pass rusher DE for 10 years or so.

 

Not every high pick will pan out. Some will be total busts like Maybin, some will be absolute studs like Jim Kelly or Bruce Smith, but most will fall into 2 broad categories: Okay-but-disappointing players like McKelvin or Whitner, or pretty-good-but-not-stars like Eric Wood or Gilmore. I think it's important when looking at overall team building to value some positions more than others in the high rounds. Because if you're not going to be willing to pay a "pretty good" CB when his contract is up, but will pay a "pretty good" LT, the LT is worth more in the long run.

 

I do agree that it's not entirely fair to judge this front office on the actions of previous front offices, but I also think there's legit cause for concern here.

 

The issue I have is this...those players we let walk left for more money than they were worth. If the DB plays to level of the contract, this front office has proven they will pay the player as we have retained multiple high priced FA's that were wroth the money. And the only player that matters here is Gilmore, the others were 15 years ago.

 

Bottom line is not over paying Gilmore was smart, we were one of the worst D's in the league with Gilmore last year...cant tackle, too many lapses in coverage, and is injury prone. Sure, like many, I would have preferred to keep him, he was still our best DB. But being our best DB, and being worth what the Pats paid him are 2 different things. I much prefer the cap flexibility that let us sign several players and then bringing in a guy who is both a leader on the field and can tackle to do along with his cover skills while also picking up an extra first and an extra third.

 

I get the emotions of 17 years no playoffs, but when making football decisions you have to let all that go...Bills made very smart football decisions with both Gilmore and the trade down/drafting of White.

[T-Bomb]

Letting Gilmore walk and drafting White stings, like many said it would.

 

Gilmore's cap hit would have stung worse. Unless he was a great player, he was never a great player...

[Jerry Jabber]

 

I think a lot of this actually serves the OP's argument. When you look at each move in and of itself, almost every move is a good one:

 

• Draft Winfield - good player
• Draft Clements - good player
• Let Winfield walk - (this one was a mistake - matching or beating his Vikings contract wouldn't have broken the bank and he remained really good for Minny)
• Let Clements walk - the right call; he wasn't worth that contract
• Draft McKelvin - seemed like a good idea at the time, but while he wasn't a total bust, you'd want better out of that high a pick
• Re-sign McKelvin - didn't have much outside interest and signed for pretty low money for a starting CB
• Cut McKelvin - his performance tailed off, starting to lose his athleticism, and maybe didn't buy in to the new scheme
• Draft Gilmore - good player (debatable how good)
• Let Gilmore walk - probably not worth that contract (I think he won't be, but time will tell)
• Draft White - seems like a good player from what I've read

But for all of that, we've stayed a middling to bad team for the entire time. Even though most of those individual moves were good decisions, they didn't lead to overall success. And that's what concerns me.

 

I get the logic of "CBs are expensive, so it makes some sense to draft good ones high, get good play on a cheap rookie deal, then let them walk and replace with another high pick." But I think that approach would work much better for an established playoff team with most of its foundational players in place. For a team like ours that's been perpetually rebuilding, I would much prefer we use our high picks to try to get (and keep!) those foundational players. Even the Maybin pick, as bad as it was, at least had potential - if Maybin had been a good player, we likely would've re-signed him to a big bucks deal, and we'd have had a stud pass rusher DE for 10 years or so.

 

Not every high pick will pan out. Some will be total busts like Maybin, some will be absolute studs like Jim Kelly or Bruce Smith, but most will fall into 2 broad categories: Okay-but-disappointing players like McKelvin or Whitner, or pretty-good-but-not-stars like Eric Wood or Gilmore. I think it's important when looking at overall team building to value some positions more than others in the high rounds. Because if you're not going to be willing to pay a "pretty good" CB when his contract is up, but will pay a "pretty good" LT, the LT is worth more in the long run.

 

I do agree that it's not entirely fair to judge this front office on the actions of previous front offices, but I also think there's legit cause for concern here.

 

Great post and I agree 100%

[Houston's #1 Bills Fan]

 

Come on man...Winfield and Clements were 15 and 12 years ago. It has literally nothing to do with this team. Not same owners, not same FO, not same philosophy, not same coaches, not same roster. I mean it has ZERO to do with anything we just did.

 

More importantly, he also missing all the context of what really happened. I mean Nate Clements became the highest paid defensive player in NFL history at that time when he left here, and he wasn't worth it. In fact, he never came close to living up to that value of that contract. That is why we didn't pay him, not because he is a DB, but because he was grossly over paid and not worth the contract. Same with Gilmore...he got a contract that out weighed his performance. They had been trying to resign him, but he wanted to be over paid. So they made the CORRECT choice and let him walk. In exchange we signed multiple other players like Hyde with the cap room saved, picked up an extra first rounder and extra 3rd rounder, and drafted a top prospect to replace him who looks like a leader and can actually make a tackle too. Not to mention, Gilmore struggles to stay healthy.

 

So this isn't a draft em and don't resign em philosophy just because we didn't resign ones 15 years ago and then avoided over paying one this offseason. Its about making the correct decision at the time they become FA's regardless of the player. Like when Byrd got over paid and was an awful signing by the Saints.

Perfectly written post. I couldn't agree with you more!! Excellent!!

[Cash]

The issue I have is this...those players we let walk left for more money than they were worth. The issue I have is this...those players we let walk left for more money than they were worth.

 

I agree.

 

Bottom line is not over paying Gilmore was smart, we were one of the worst D's in the league with Gilmore last year...cant tackle, too many lapses in coverage, and is injury prone. Sure, like many, I would have preferred to keep him, he was still our best DB.

 

I agree with all of this.

 

But being our best DB, and being worth what the Pats paid him are 2 different things. I much prefer the cap flexibility that let us sign several players and then bringing in a guy who is both a leader on the field and can tackle to do along with his cover skills while also picking up an extra first and an extra third.

 

I agree with all of this as well.

 

Bills made very smart football decisions with both Gilmore

 

I only sort of agree with this. Gilmore was a good, not great pick - solid starter who seemed like he could be elite but never really was. And I definitely think letting him walk for the money involved was the right move. But if we step back and look at it as a whole, we spent the #10 pick in the draft and got 5 years of good-not-great CB play, and now have nothing to show for it - not even a comp pick. Is that good team building? For a team with a franchise QB tying up lots of cap $, maybe. For a team in the 6-10 to 9-7 range, I personally don't think so.

 

and the trade down/drafting of White.

 

I separate the trade down from the White pick. I love the trade down and I'm fine with the White pick but don't love it. I would've hated drafting Lattimore at #10 - that would truly be a "spinning our wheels" scenario. On the other hand, if White becomes good-not-great and walks after 5 years, we at least got a 2017 3rd and a 2018 1st out of that #10 overall pick.

 

If the DB plays to level of the contract, this front office has proven they will pay the player as we have retained multiple high priced FA's that were wroth the money.

 

Have they? The only high-pick DBs that the Bills have signed to second contracts since the Winfield days were McKelvin and Aaron Williams. And only Williams really fits the bill of a guy who panned out and then got a upper-market contract - if McKelvin had gotten a Gilmore/Clements/Winfield type offer, the Bills would've let him walk. Now, the Bills have shown they'll pay players - Cordy Glenn, Marcell Dareus, Aaron Williams, and Eric Wood are recent high picks who've been re-signed. Jerry Hughes could maybe count as well, since he was re-signed after his 1st-round rookie contract expired. If you want to look at all picks, you can add Stevie Johnson and Kyle Williams to the mix.

 

(As a sidebar, I'm really surprised how short the above list is - I was expecting more names.)

 

Most of those guys play on the lines - these are the kind of foundational players that typically are prioritized in the early rounds. On the other hand, here's my list of high picks who panned out but then weren't re-signed: Robert Woods, Gilmore, CJ Spiller, Jairus Byrd, Andy Levitre, Marshawn Lynch, Paul Posluszny, and the list can go on but that's pretty far back already. Only 1 of those guys plays on either line, 2 are DBs, and 2 are RBs.

Edited April 28, 2017 by Cash

[mjt328]

You are getting way too hung up on the position we drafted and not the player.

 

Every single team goes through the cycle of drafting players, then watching those players walk out the door as Free Agents. It's not a Buffalo Bills phenomenon. Because of the salary cap, it's impossible to re-sign everybody. The key to getting ahead of the game is:

 

1) Keep the pipeline full by hitting on enough of your draft picks

2) Make smart decisions about which players to extend, and which players to let go

3) Try to find the bargains in free agency

4) If you do hand out a big free agent contract, that player better make a huge impact

 

 

In my opinion, letting Stephon Gilmore leave was a smart decision. Yes, it created a hole. But his overpriced salary would have eventually (if not this year, then 1-2 years down the road) created a burden on the salary cap, that wasn't worth it for his impact on the field. Now if he was Darrelle Revis in his prime, or Richard Sherman, or Patrick Peterson, then his impact may have been worth that salary. But I just saw too much inconsistent play out of the guy.

 

In my opinion, drafting Tre'Davious White was also a smart decision. Many of the top analysts and draft sites had White ranked as the #2 CB in one of the deepest secondary drafts in decades. We got him at #27, after adding a 1st Rounder next year and a 3rd Rounder this year.

 

The fact that Gilmore and White play the same position means absolutely nothing.

 

I agree.

 

 

I agree with all of this.

 

 

I agree with all of this as well.

 

 

I only sort of agree with this. Gilmore was a good, not great pick - solid starter who seemed like he could be elite but never really was. And I definitely think letting him walk for the money involved was the right move. But if we step back and look at it as a whole, we spent the #10 pick in the draft and got 5 years of good-not-great CB play, and now have nothing to show for it - not even a comp pick. Is that good team building? For a team with a franchise QB tying up lots of cap $, maybe. For a team in the 6-10 to 9-7 range, I personally don't think so.

 

 

I separate the trade down from the White pick. I love the trade down and I'm fine with the White pick but don't love it. I would've hated drafting Lattimore at #10 - that would truly be a "spinning our wheels" scenario. On the other hand, if White becomes good-not-great and walks after 5 years, we at least got a 2017 3rd and a 2018 1st out of that #10 overall pick.

 

 

Have they? The only high-pick DBs that the Bills have signed to second contracts since the Winfield days were McKelvin and Aaron Williams. And only Williams really fits the bill of a guy who panned out and then got a upper-market contract - if McKelvin had gotten a Gilmore/Clements/Winfield type offer, the Bills would've let him walk. Now, the Bills have shown they'll pay players - Cordy Glenn, Marcell Dareus, Aaron Williams, and Eric Wood are recent high picks who've been re-signed. Jerry Hughes could maybe count as well, since he was re-signed after his 1st-round rookie contract expired. If you want to look at all picks, you can add Stevie Johnson and Kyle Williams to the mix.

 

(As a sidebar, I'm really surprised how short the above list is - I was expecting more names.)

 

Most of those guys play on the lines - these are the kind of foundational players that typically are prioritized in the early rounds. On the other hand, here's my list of high picks who panned out but then weren't re-signed: Robert Woods, Gilmore, CJ Spiller, Jairus Byrd, Andy Levitre, Marshawn Lynch, Paul Posluszny, and the list can go on but that's pretty far back already. Only 1 of those guys plays on either line, 2 are DBs, and 2 are RBs.

 

The Bills also paid Terrence McGee.

 

Out of all the guys you mentioned not being re-signed, how many were actually mistakes?

 

Marshawn Lynch (who was traded because of off-field problems)

Jason Peters (who you didn't mention, but definitely should be on the list)

 

All of the other guys completely busted as Free Agent signings, or were nothing more than solid/decent.

Edited April 28, 2017 by mjt328

[Jerry Jabber]

Over this 17 year drought, it seems two important things are missing: Building a good solid foundation on both sides of the ball (Offense- A solid O-line and a good QB; Defense: a good front seven); and building the team to win the division. Do the Bills currently have a solid foundation on offense? No. So far, Taylor has proven to be an above average backup, but below average starter. The O-line does a great job at run blocking, but the right side of the line is weak at pass protection. On defense, do they have a solid foundation in place? No. While KW, Dareus and Hughes are three very good players, Lawson and Ragland are unknown. Alexander was good in Rex's scheme, but how will he do in a 4/3? Alexander and Humber are both special teams players, which is a plus, but overall, the LB corps could use an upgrade.

 

Are the current Bills built to win the division? No. We've seen over the years playing against Brady, it doesn't matter how good our secondary is, if the Bills are unable to get constant pressure on Brady and he has time in the pocket, eventually someone gets open for Brady to make a play, especially in a zone defense. The Broncos showed in the AFC Championship game two years ago the blueprint on how to beat Brady and that's constant pressure on

him. Brady has always had a good O-line in front of him and that is something the Bills need, along with an elite caliber QB. So back to the topic, it would make more sense for the Bills to use high round draft picks foundational type players first, until they have those key players in place.

Edited April 28, 2017 by Jerry Jabber

[BuffaloBillsGospel]

IMO, the Bills wasted too many first round draft picks on CB’s over the years as they are very rarely resigned (Winfield, Clements, Gilmore). If a first round CB does well in his rookie contract, his next one is usually too high for the Bills to keep him, so the way I look at it, it’s a wasted pick as that CB will be only on the team for five years, vice taking a player that has more of an opportunity to stay on the team longer than his rookie deal. First round picks should be used on players that are impact players as well as being on your team for 8-10 years (or more), so it would make more sense to draft a CB in the lower rounds. Constantly replacing DB's every four to five years is a terrible move. I highly doubt T. White will be resigned after his rookie deal ends, so the Bills will have to go through this again in four to five years. When will they ever learn?

 

The upside of this is the rookie contract, compared to the millions just shelled out to Gilmore you can spend money elsewhere, if he's even close to the player Gilmore is it's a huge win for your team.

[BringBackOrton]

 

White has much to do with the trade. And tell me, how would you feel if we stayed at 10 and picked Lattimore instead, which reports have said was the plan until the trade went through?

That would've sucked worse. But that's no excuse.

[John from Riverside]

That would've sucked worse. But that's no excuse.

No excuse for WHAT

[Jerry Jabber]

 

The upside of this is the rookie contract, compared to the millions just shelled out to Gilmore you can spend money elsewhere, if he's even close to the player Gilmore is it's a huge win for your team.

It was a mistake to use a first round pick on Gilmore to begin with.

[John from Riverside]

It was a mistake to use a first round pick on Gilmore to begin with.

It was?

[Jerry Jabber]

It was?

I think Cash said it best. "I only sort of agree with this. Gilmore was a good, not great pick - solid starter who seemed like he could be elite but never really was. And I definitely think letting him walk for the money involved was the right move. But if we step back and look at it as a whole, we spent the #10 pick in the draft and got 5 years of good-not-great CB play, and now have nothing to show for it - not even a comp pick. Is that good team building? For a team with a franchise QB tying up lots of cap $, maybe. For a team in the 6-10 to 9-7 range, I personally don't think so."

[ndirish1978]

It was a mistake to use a first round pick on Gilmore to begin with.

 

So this is not just a general complaint, it's also a revisionist history complaint for when the facts arguably align with your hot take. Good to know.

[DrDawkinstein]

It was a mistake to use a first round pick on Gilmore to begin with.

 

Here's the 2012 draft. Please enlighten us with who you would have picked instead.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_NFL_Draft

[Pirate Angel]

They pay big contracts to players who they believe are elite....gilmore, jarius Byrd, levitre where all good players but they weren't great, letting them walk was the right call. If Dareus has his act together he can dominate the interior he can potentially be a great player, they cannot replace him with a player of his talent...

[Malazan]

Since I was curious, I took a look at # of CBs drafted in the 1st round by team since 1999:

 

 

Why you gotta go and bring reality into this?

[John from Riverside]

 

Here's the 2012 draft. Please enlighten us with who you would have picked instead.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_NFL_Draft

Well we did pretty good on our 1st two picks anyway

[Jerry Jabber]

 

So this is not just a general complaint, it's also a revisionist history complaint for when the facts arguably align with your hot take. Good to know.

It's just clear that the Bills have been trying to build their team the wrong way for years. The Raiders have been bad since their Super Bowl appearance, but they finally figured out how to build their team right, a great O-line in front of their QB. They built their foundation first. By hey, it's just a revisionist history anyways, right?!

 

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it...sounds exactly like the Bills over these past 17 years.

[Jerry Jabber]

 

Here's the 2012 draft. Please enlighten us with who you would have picked instead.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_NFL_Draft

I remember at the time hoping Kuechly would have been available, but since he wasn't, I would have tried to move down, gained more picks and drafted Riley Reiff.