The Most Scathing Draft Review You’ll Find- Rotoworld’s Evan Silva Rips Into Class and McDermott’s Personnel Evaluations

[clearwater cadet]

Sweet!!!! never heard of him.

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Not really.  Dawkins and Ducasse are back and Ducasse (who some have said actually played well last season) will be challenged by Miller, who should benefit from the move away from zone blocking.  Mills is back and also may benefit, and should be challenged by Newhouse, McDermott, and maybe Boettger.  Bodine started for the Bengals all of his 4 seasons there, they made the playoffs his first 2, and reportedly he didn't surrender a sack last year.  He might be challenged by Groy, although they may want Groy to play LG, and he'll be challenged by Teller, who I'm betting is the opening day starter.

 

I am pretty sure they want Groy at C. Again just following the trends from Carolina they were a big believer in committing resource at center.  The only way I see Groy in the guard conversation is if Bodine straight up beats him out at C, which I don't expect.  It isn't going to be the "get your best 5 out there" approach that some here, bandit I know for example, advocate.  If Groy is their best center he will play center even if that means a rookie starting at LG who isn't yet as good of a starting G as Bodine is a starting C.  

 

My darkhorse on the line is Connor McDermott. I really expect him to get a chance to win the RT job in camp.  

[Hapless Bills Fan]

7 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Not really.  Dawkins and Ducasse are back and Ducasse (who some have said actually played well last season) will be challenged by Miller, who should benefit from the move away from zone blocking.  Mills is back and also may benefit, and should be challenged by Newhouse, McDermott, and maybe Boettger.  Bodine started for the Bengals all of his 4 seasons there, they made the playoffs his first 2, and reportedly he didn't surrender a sack last year.  He might be challenged by Groy, although they may want Groy to play LG, and he'll be challenged by Teller, who I'm betting is the opening day starter.

 

Erm....no offense (ha!) Doc, but I think you just argued my point.  We lost 3 starters on OL and changed OC and likely scheme.  That's huge for a pro OL.

 

Lots of unknowables....why was Miller in the doghouse and will he be let off with a more Power scheme?  How will Ducasse handle that?  Will Dawkins play as well next to the new LG and Center, whoever they may be?  How will Groy play at LG if Bodine starts at C?  How will Castillo handle coaching whatever blocking scheme Daboll wants used?  How will he work with Daboll?

 

OL is interdependent and line play is heavily influenced by how well each man works with the guy next to him.  That's why we see things like Glenn and Wood look like crap one year with Urbik between them and Pears at RG, then next year with Cog in the middle and Miller at guard they look decent.  Groy looked OK at center between Cog and Miller in 2016, would he look the same between every LG and RG? Likely no.

 

You could be right, could be pretty good.  Or it could be a total train wreck.

Just depends on factors we really can't know at this point: what the scheme really is, how well its coached, how well guys play with diff. lineman next to them etc.

[Doc]

4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

I am pretty sure they want Groy at C. Again just following the trends from Carolina they were a big believer in committing resource at center.  The only way I see Groy in the guard conversation is if Bodine straight up beats him out at C, which I don't expect.  It isn't going to be the "get your best 5 out there" approach that some here, bandit I know for example, advocate.  If Groy is their best center he will play center even if that means a rookie starting at LG who isn't yet as good of a starting G as Bodine is a starting C.  

 

My darkhorse on the line is Connor McDermott. I really expect him to get a chance to win the RT job in camp.  

 

I hope they have Groy and Bodine compete at C.  I think Groy is a far better C than G and Bodine as I mentioned has started for the Bengals when they made the playoffs (not implying he's the reason, just that he was good enough to start for a playoff team).  The reason why I think they put Groy at G is because that's where they had him last year.  Now that might have been a function of the zone blocking scheme, but I can't say until they put out a prelim depth chart.  I would rather have the better of Groy or Bodine start at C and Teller at LG than Bodine at C and Groy at LG, unless they prove to be the best at those positions.

3 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

Erm....no offense (ha!) Doc, but I think you just argued my point.  We lost 3 starters on OL and changed OC and likely scheme.  That's huge for a pro OL.

 

Lots of unknowables....why was Miller in the doghouse and will he be let off with a more Power scheme?  How will Ducasse handle that?  Will Dawkins play as well next to the new LG and Center, whoever they may be?  How will Groy play at LG if Bodine starts at C?  How will Castillo handle coaching whatever blocking scheme Daboll wants used?  How will he work with Daboll?

 

OL is interdependent and line play is heavily influenced by how well each man works with the guy next to him.  That's why we see things like Glenn and Wood look like crap one year with Urbik between them and Pears at RG, then next year with Cog in the middle and Miller at guard they look decent.  Groy looked OK at center between Cog and Miller in 2016, would he look the same between every LG and RG? Likely no.

 

You could be right, could be pretty good.  Or it could be a total train wreck.

Just depends on factors we really can't know at this point: what the scheme really is, how well its coached, how well guys play with diff. lineman next to them etc.

 

True.

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, Doc said:

 

I hope they have Groy and Bodine compete at C.  I think Groy is a far better C than G and Bodine as I mentioned has started for the Bengals when they made the playoffs (not implying he's the reason, just that he was good enough to start for a playoff team).  The reason why I think they put Groy at G is because that's where they had him last year.  Now that might have been a function of the zone blocking scheme, but I can't say until they put out a prelim depth chart.  I would rather have the better of Groy or Bodine start at C and Teller at LG than Bodine at C and Groy at LG, unless they prove to be the best at those positions.

 

True.

 

They actually had him listed as the backup both at C and at LG on the depth chart.  The only time he got on the field (other than as an extra tackle) was at LG in a game were Richie missed a series or two but like I say the Carolina model is you value the center.  I think you are going to get your wish though.  

[LittleSammy]

If Evan Silva was a qualified talent evaluator he'd be in the front office of an NFL franchise. The closest he has ever been to football is when he was in the high school AV Club and ran the projector for his team's meetings!

[BullBuchanan]

1 hour ago, RyanC883 said:

 

not liking the Edmunds pick should disqualify anyone from ranking a draft EVER again.  He was a top 10 talent by almost any measure and by anyone who ranks prospects. 

 

Really? He's kind of the same player as Allen is: an athletic freak that doesn't have a pro level skilkset at this time. There are a lot of concerns about his ability to diagnose plays, not get baited, and to take appropriate angles to the ball. Not exactly small concerns for an MLB prospect.

[CaptnCoke11]

2 hours ago, The 9 Isles said:

He is also an a-hole that battled with some Bills fans on twitter a while back. He is a thin skinned baby that holds grudges. Who cares what that baby says? 

Obviously you do with the insults 

[Peter]

2 hours ago, Magox said:

The word is that the Bills were in a bidding war at 7 with the Cardinals and that they both coveted Allen.   Whether or not you personally like Allen is besides the point and you have to throw out the draft chart if you are going after your franchise QB, specially considering that they were trying to target him at 5.   If you are going after someone at 5 and trading 2 2nds would have been a deal at that slot but now you are still targeting the same guy at 7 and now all of a sudden it's not a good "value"?  That's stupid.

 

They "overpaid" because they were about to lose him to the Cards.  If you believe that you could be getting your franchise QB and you trade away 2 2nds to get him along with a 1st rounder, I would say that is not too much to give up.

 

Maybe my memory is incorrect, but it always seems as though we have overpaid or undersold over the past few years.

 

It would be nice to not always have to explain why we "overpaid" or "undersold."

 

This would be especially nice given the risk and that we are not talking about Andrew Luck here.  Josh Allen is a developmental prospect that could end up being great . . . or could end up setting the franchise back given all we paid to get him (including Cordy Glenn).

 

I really hope that he turns out to be a franchise QB.  That would be great.  He seems like a decent kid and he has fully embraced Buffalo and the Bills.

 

As it stands now, however, Josh Allen is no Rasmus Dahlin.

Edited April 30, 2018 by Peter

[PromoTheRobot]

55 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

 

Not really. If there is no competitor, would you rather keep your #10 pick and take Miller, or trade down to #15, take Miller, and get an extra 3rd? 

 

Interesting. That means Miami had no interest in Rosen. So the Cardinals wasted picks getting ahead of the Dolphins.

[Antonio]

If you get your FRANCHISE QB for 2 2nd Rounders it is a great deal. Nobody will remember the cost, just like nobody is mad because the Eagles made a move and gave up a LOT to get their guy. At the end of the day, the end result is what matters. 

 

Of course if it doesn´t pan out even a single 1st rounder would be consider a big loss, just like EJ´s pick even though we traded down and got him.  

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Interesting. That means Miami had no interest in Rosen. So the Cardinals wasted picks getting ahead of the Dolphins.

 

I don't think the Dolphins ever wanted Rosen.  I think for them they wanted Mayfield and if it wasn't him they were sticking with Tanny.  

[Hapless Bills Fan]

 

1 hour ago, Ifartalot said:

What Arizona gave up to  trade up for Rosen did make it look like the Bills overpaid for Allen.

 

Think of it as a sort of "Dutch auction" model, where you start high and lower your price until one bidder accepts.  That bidder gets 1st pick of the goods, and the right to pick first is part of what they're paying for.  Then you lower the price until a second bidder accepts.  They get 2nd pick of the goods, and they're paying a lower price partly because, less goods to pick from.

 

Not an exact analogy I know, but the Jets gave up most (3 #2s) because they had 2nd choice.  Beane gave up more (2 #2s) so he could take 3rd choice of the QB.  By the time the Cards traded up, they were left with 4th choice of QB, so the price was lower, only a 3rd and 5th (I think they got a bargain and the Raiders got taken a bit, but that's what happens when other bidders fall out)

[dave mcbride]

25 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Interesting. That means Miami had no interest in Rosen. So the Cardinals wasted picks getting ahead of the Dolphins.

Hard to say, but if I'm AZ, I'm not taking the chance to find out. 

[Lfod]

I'm not surprised. Before the draft a lot of people were not liking Josh Allen. A guy on this forum posted a very funny video about the Bills drafting him. I never knew what happened to that video but it was hilarious!

 

Josh Allen wasn't though highly of compared to the other QBs in this draft and you throw in leaked tweets with even some having racial stuff to them and what you have is a perfect storm. 

 

A majority including myself wanted Beane to pick a QB. I assume Beane selected Josh Allen with the understanding it wasn't going to be a popular pick. I assume he made the pick knowing he would get roasted over it. 

 

I don't know if Josh Allen will be good. I don't have a lot of options. I can be bitter and trash it or accept it and hope for the best. I do respect that Beane made the pick that would make him unpopular and knowing it comes with backlash. That takes some backbone. I can respect that at least. If he is wrong I believe it will cost him and I respect he put his throat out to be cut in Josh Allen's name. Good or bad pick I absolutely respect he made it. 

 

Beane really isn't in a position to get it wrong. He doesn't have the luxury of being wrong. Josh Allen has to be good or it's a huge stain on his record.

 

I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. I'm not going to defend the pick. I'll let people vent about it. If Beane was right he was right in the face of a lot of opposition and doubt. We either have a genius GM or a very incompetent GM in way over his head. The best part for me is there is no middle ground here and I love it.

Edited April 30, 2018 by Lfod

[bufrock j]

2 hours ago, RyanC883 said:

Meanwhile, Mike Mayock has us taking 2 of his top 11 players (Allen and Edmunds).  If you leave a draft with two top 11 players, with picks 12 and 22 to start, you win.  

 

Also, Edmunds is a top 4 talent on many people's board.  Getting him at 16 was a steal, as was Phillips in the 3rd.  It's like we didn't need those 2nd rounders that we "overpaid" for.  

 

I've been a HUGE critic of drafting Allen.  By every metric he will be a top tier backup at best.  Hopefully those metrics are wrong, or AJ goes nuts this year, keeps Allen on the bench and we trade Allen in a year or 2 for a 1st and 2nd.  

 

Overall, I'd give us an A.  Esp. when you consider the UDFA haul we pulled in.  

whats so great about UDFA's   honest question 

[Real McClappy]

3 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

I pretty much predicted the crap storm that would ensue after this draft. Too many divergent opinions on who the QB ought to be.

 

Of course I love the hypocrisy over the picks that were traded to move up. All I heard going in was no price was too high for your franchise QB. "Trade every pick if you have to! No other position matters! What are you saving those picks for anyway?" It's hard to take anything seriously anymore.

This post is spot on.

 

All the back and forth drama on who to take and how much to trade up for our QB the last month here kept me off the boards. Now people preferences have completely clouded their mind like the "Not my president" gang  as the Bills did not draft the guy they had rated higher. Not my QB is the new title for these guys that can't adopt.

 

What's also comical is some would have traded the entire draft for Rosen at #2 and (1st rd) draft stock next year.  We get Allen at a fraction of that cost and still land Edmunds and those same posters (names withheld) are trashing the FO. 

 

There are some serious TBD GM's around here that know better than Beane and our professional scouts. I'm sure Beane and Co. know there is about a 30% chance Allen will work out to be a true franchise QB the next 15 years.. The same applies to the rest of the big 4 as history has told us over and over again.

 

People just don't know how to TRUST after being beat down by so many failed regimes of years past. This FO is different and you already seen us break THE 18 year playoff drought end. I'm sure their PROCESS for determining Allen is the guy was scrubbed over and over again until the decision to draft him was made and completed. 

Edited April 30, 2018 by Real McCoy

[CuddyDark]

I wasn't for this QB, but if Bills run that 'Bama offense or that college offense the Panthers ran with Cam it could get interesting this year. If Allen is a two read runner it will open the offense. Bills could actually be better than last year if they see/use Allen like Cam, Tyrod or Foles.

[SouthNYfan]

53 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

 

Think of it as a sort of "Dutch auction" model, where you start high and lower your price until one bidder accepts.  That bidder gets 1st pick of the goods, and the right to pick first is part of what they're paying for.  Then you lower the price until a second bidder accepts.  They get 2nd pick of the goods, and they're paying a lower price partly because, less goods to pick from.

 

Not an exact analogy I know, but the Jets gave up most (3 #2s) because they had 2nd choice.  Beane gave up more (2 #2s) so he could take 3rd choice of the QB.  By the time the Cards traded up, they were left with 4th choice of QB, so the price was lower, only a 3rd and 5th (I think they got a bargain and the Raiders got taken a bit, but that's what happens when other bidders fall out)

 

Agreed.

We "overpaid" the QB premium on draft pick cost, similar to what the Jets did.

Draft value charts don't take into account positional value.

The Cardinals actually paid BELOW normal market value on the trade value chart, so when taking the QB premium into account, they got a steal, but also may not have got the guy they really wanted.

We amassed draft capital over the past 12+ months up give us the ability to "overpay" without crippling this year/future drafts.

Did we take the right QB? Time will tell, but we all least got the guy that our front office and coaching staff wanted, while not giving up the farm (we didn't even give up the prized hog) and walked away with a potential franchise QB and a likely 10+ year linebacker defensive captain.

I'm good with the outcome.

Just get the kid a line and somebody to catch the balls he's launching from that howitzer.

[The 9 Isles]

1 hour ago, CaptnCoke11 said:

Obviously you do with the insults 

Always has to be one you in every group.