Who is your "not with a 10 foot pole" first round pick?

[Hapless Bills Fan]

15 minutes ago, Commonsense said:

Oh my. I'm sure a guy that worked for NFL Network and is currently working for SI has legitimate contacts inside real NFL buildings. That's a heck of a lot more than any average fan can offer and it's worth mentioning. So now Schrager, Breer, and Doug Gottleib all know nothing and have ill intentions while reporting on Lamar Jackson. 

 

Find someone to go on twitter and harass them about it I'm sure they will be happy to respond to that nonsense. 

 

Real NFL reporters. Fans. Know the difference. Zzzzz.

 

Dude.  That he has contacts is indisputable.  That his contacts are feeding him straight gouge at this time of year is a different proposition.  Can you understand the difference?  This is not about "real NFL reporters. Fans. Know the difference." it's about the immense amount of conflicting information that is given to "real NFL reporters" at this time of year.

You learn the difference.

 

For example there's another thread linking an SI article quoting 3 QB coaches.  According to that article, Rosen was by far the best at the whiteboard and "it's not close.  He's by far the most advanced", Darnold was "OK in our meeting with him.  He was not as far along as I thought he'd be" Mayfield "seems to want to learn" "he has a long way to go" and Jackson "I really loved the kid..we were laughing and joking in our meeting"  No comment on Allen's whiteboard skills.

 

Then we have Doug Gottleib tweeting "#NFLCombine - a GM told me #BakerMayfield football IQ is “off the charts”, Darnold, Rosen excellent, Rudolph very good, Allen was so so, long way to go. Jackson is a project at the white board by comparison"

 

Two reporters with "legitimate contacts inside real NFL buildings".

One report: Rosen>>>>>>>>everyone else, Darnold "OK" Mayfield "long way to go"

Another report: Mayfield >>>>>>>>everyone else, Rosen Darnold ~=, Allen Jackson "long way to go"

 

Get the flick?  It's not reliable.  For a fan (that would be you) to make definitive pronouncements about a QB based on what you read about what someone said to someone who reiterated it, is silly - for you.

 

 

[CommonCents]

1 minute ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Dude.  That he has contacts is indisputable.  That his contacts are feeding him straight gouge at this time of year is a different proposition.  Can you understand the difference?  This is not about "real NFL reporters. Fans. Know the difference." it's about the immense amount of conflicting information that is given to "real NFL reporters" at this time of year.

You learn the difference.

 

For example there's another thread linking an SI article quoting 3 QB coaches.  According to that article, Rosen was by far the best at the whiteboard and "it's not close.  He's by far the most advanced", Darnold was "OK in our meeting with him.  He was not as far along as I thought he'd be" Mayfield "seems to want to learn" "he has a long way to go" and Jackson "I really loved the kid..we were laughing and joking in our meeting"  No comment on Allen's whiteboard skills.

 

Then we have Doug Gottleib tweeting "#NFLCombine - a GM told me #BakerMayfield football IQ is “off the charts”, Darnold, Rosen excellent, Rudolph very good, Allen was so so, long way to go. Jackson is a project at the white board by comparison"

 

Two reporters with "legitimate contacts inside real NFL buildings".

One report: Rosen>>>>>>>>everyone else, Darnold "OK" Mayfield "long way to go"

Another report: Mayfield >>>>>>>>everyone else, Rosen Darnold ~=, Allen Jackson "long way to go"

 

Get the flick?  It's not reliable.  For a fan (that would be you) to make definitive pronouncements about a QB based on what you read about what someone said to someone who reiterated it, is silly - for you.

 

 

This is a thread about who WE as fans wouldn't touch in the draft. Follow? I used real sources for my reasoning why I wouldn't touch either Allen or Jackson. For you to enter the thread and shout down an actual reporter as supplying false information is pretty ridiculous. As I said in my previous post Breer is bluntly honest and is so blunt I'd consider it unprofessional. I have a very hard time believing all three of the names I cited are just making things up or being fed false information. Intresting that Breer was harsh on Allen and then Jackson who Dougie Fresh also had as projects. 

 

I never said I believed Breer was in the whiteboard meetings, you mentioned that not only in your reply to me but the one to Bandit also. That is trying to discredit Breer by exaggerating the original message. If you don't believe him fine, I couldn't care less. This time of year everyone likes to play GM and get as much information on players as we can. I shared information from reliable people. Take it how you wish. When someone comes out and praises Jackson which will inevitably happen during this drawn out process then the guys that want Jackson can decipher that message that they see fit.

 

That's an odd way to start a conversation if your intention was to discuss Jackson as a player. 

 

Jackson's accuracy is a no go for me. He has warts that the Bills can avoid by packaging the picks and moving up. That's what I'd like them to do. Get a quarterback who processes the game and can play the position. EJ can't process. Tyrod can't process. Nate can or can't process? He sure as heck can't play. I'm not bashing Jackson he throws with more anticipation than Tyrod and runs better, he would be an improvement but the Bills can do better if they are willing to finally take a risk. The End!

[Freddie's Dead]

LOL, every QB the Bills could pick is mentioned multiple times in this thread.  Good to know there's a consensus at TBD.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

36 minutes ago, Commonsense said:

This is a thread about who WE as fans wouldn't touch in the draft. Follow? I used real sources for my reasoning why I wouldn't touch either Allen or Jackson. For you to enter the thread and shout down an actual reporter as supplying false information is pretty ridiculous. As I said in my previous post Breer is bluntly honest and is so blunt I'd consider it unprofessional. I have a very hard time believing all three of the names I cited are just making things up or being fed false information. Intresting that Breer was harsh on Allen and then Jackson who Dougie Fresh also had as projects.

 

Nope, buddy, not the end.  You cite one source and then disparage me for pointing out that this time of year, misinformation (including from people with inside sources) abounds and comparing two sources.

 

You don't get to pick one "real source" for your reasoning and discard others, then climb up on "Mount You-hoo" and claim to be Mr Facts while disparaging me for pointing out that it's pretty damn well known misinformation and conflicting information abound from "real sources" at this time of year.

 

But, I somehow get the flick that being able to see and acknowledge someone else's point is not your teacup so now "the End".

 

 

[CommonCents]

1 minute ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Nope, buddy, not the end.  You cite one source and then disparage me for pointing out that this time of year, misinformation (including from people with inside sources) abounds and comparing two sources.

 

You don't get to pick one "real source" for your reasoning and discard others, then climb up on "Mount You-hoo" and claim to be Mr Facts while disparaging me for pointing out that it's pretty damn well known misinformation and conflicting information abound from "real sources" at this time of year.

 

But, I somehow get the flick that being able to see and acknowledge someone else's point is not your teacup so now "the End".

 

 

You made zero points and never talked about the player. Your whole basis for replying is that Breer's comments were based on misinformation which is ridiculous. Then you exaggerate to make it sound like he implied he was at the whiteboard with Lamar. Now apparently you can't count because I linked and mentioned Doug G. reporting almost the same thing Breer did. So that is in fact multiple professional sources making the same claims. 

 

Again, don't believe it. I don't care. Just don't respond and act like posting information from legitimate reporters is frowned upon.

[SmokinES3]

Jackson.

[Turk71]

5 hours ago, billsfan89 said:

 

It also seems to me that running back is a position where 1 major injury can lead you to fall off a cliff much quicker than any other position. I also feel like really good backs are found in later rounds more often than other positions. As good as Barkley can be (I think he has AP levels of potential) I think you are better off trying to get a QB if you are the Browns and then hope he falls to pick 4 where it is a lower (although still high) level of risk. 

 

In general the earliest I would draft a RB is the mid to late 1st. It seems like Pass rushers, QB's, CB's, and OT's are all a lot harder to come by. 

Because rbs have a shorter shelf life I think if they are good enough to warrant a 1st round pick they are one of the safest positions. Think about it, their able to contribute immediately and you get their best years many times on a rookie contract pay scale. I think the riskiest are those whose talent may not translate or whose position takes longer to peak. You end up developing players and then losing them to fa just when they are coming into their prime.

[billsfan89]

24 minutes ago, Turk71 said:

Because rbs have a shorter shelf life I think if they are good enough to warrant a 1st round pick they are one of the safest positions. Think about it, their able to contribute immediately and you get their best years many times on a rookie contract pay scale. I think the riskiest are those whose talent may not translate or whose position takes longer to peak. You end up developing players and then losing them to fa just when they are coming into their prime.

 

I think that RB's have a long enough life to play well into a 2nd contract. By the end of their rookie deals they are 25-26, they command big money because they have 3-5 prime years left. RB's typically don't get a big contract after their 2nd deal, a player like Shady is an exception. 

 

If I am drafting a player 1st overall I don't want that pick to be not on my team 6 years from now because they got hurt of flamed out. I think the fact that you can find RB's at so many different points in the draft and via free agency makes them a very risky proposition to spend a premium pick on. 

[Turk71]

6 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

I think that RB's have a long enough life to play well into a 2nd contract. By the end of their rookie deals they are 25-26, they command big money because they have 3-5 prime years left. RB's typically don't get a big contract after their 2nd deal, a player like Shady is an exception. 

 

If I am drafting a player 1st overall I don't want that pick to be not on my team 6 years from now because they got hurt of flamed out. I think the fact that you can find RB's at so many different points in the draft and via free agency makes them a very risky proposition to spend a premium pick on. 

1st rd contracts come with 5th year options I think which would make most of them 27 , some rbs go on to produce well after 5 yrs many others are banged up by then. The point is you could still keep them for a 2nd contract,  but to get the bulk of their productive years on a rookie contract is a huge bonus when managing cap.

Edited March 7, 2018 by Turk71

[billsfan89]

3 minutes ago, Turk71 said:

1st rd contracts come with 5th year options I think which would make most of them 27 , some rbs go on to produce well after 5 yrs many others are banged up by then. The point is you could still keep them for a 2nd contract,  but to get the bulk of their productive years on a rookie contract is a huge bonus when managing cap.

 

That's a good point, but the replaceability of the position (So many RB's have good 3-5 year stretches being drafted in the 3rd round of later) makes spending a top pick on it such a risky proposition when you are talking about a top 10 pick or even a 1st round pick in general. I would rather try to get a top QB or pass rusher with a top 5 pick rather than a RB. 

 

I would much rather have a Von Miller than an Adrian Peterson if I am choosing either type of player with a top 5 pick. I think it is a lot easier to find a solid pair of RB's who can be productive than it would be to find a good pass rusher. 

[Fadingpain]

The player I wouldn't touch with a 100 foot pole in ANY round of the draft is Lamar Jackson.

 

This dude's middle name is "bust".

 

 

[Turk71]

1 minute ago, billsfan89 said:

 

That's a good point, but the replaceability of the position (So many RB's have good 3-5 year stretches being drafted in the 3rd round of later) makes spending a top pick on it such a risky proposition when you are talking about a top 10 pick or even a 1st round pick in general. I would rather try to get a top QB or pass rusher with a top 5 pick rather than a RB. 

 

I would much rather have a Von Miller than an Adrian Peterson if I am choosing either type of player with a top 5 pick. I think it is a lot easier to find a solid pair of RB's who can be productive than it would be to find a good pass rusher. 

 I agree it would have to be a rare talent and to a team that has a qb and other parts to warrant a top pick. 

[billsfan89]

1 minute ago, Turk71 said:

 I agree it would have to be a rare talent and to a team that has a qb and other parts to warrant a top pick. 

 

You are correct that a team would have to have a QB and drafting at a point where a top QB wasn't highly coveted in a trade down. That's why the Cowboys drafted Zeke so high. They had Romo, Zeke was a rare talent, and they had the O-line to maximize him. I was shocked the Jags drafted a RB so high last year given their needs elsewhere. 

 

But I would also rather take a chance on a highly coveted pass rusher if one is a high-end talent than even a generational RB. Maybe even a LT or a CB is more appealing. It's all a cost-benefit analysis and I think the cost of a premium pick at RB is one that would almost never lineup for me personally. 

[Turk71]

7 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

You are correct that a team would have to have a QB and drafting at a point where a top QB wasn't highly coveted in a trade down. That's why the Cowboys drafted Zeke so high. They had Romo, Zeke was a rare talent, and they had the O-line to maximize him. I was shocked the Jags drafted a RB so high last year given their needs elsewhere. 

 

But I would also rather take a chance on a highly coveted pass rusher if one is a high-end talent than even a generational RB. Maybe even a LT or a CB is more appealing. It's all a cost-benefit analysis and I think the cost of a premium pick at RB is one that would almost never lineup for me personally. 

The Bills are spending a lot of money at rb right now. Almost tops in the league. Giving 3 million for a potentially washed up backup Ivory is more than some of the leagues top backs still on rookie contracts make. I am not saying I would spend a top pick on a back , but getting good production from players on rookie deals at any position is huge for managing cap. Some positions seem to take longer adjusting to the pros. I have not ever advocated the Bills taking a rb high in the draft, too many other needs at pos. with less depth of talent.