Players that need replaced in 2019 for the Bills to succeed?

[Mickey]

2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I don’t expect them to use all 10 picks. I expect them to use those picks to move up for specific guys that they have been trying to get. As an example, the Bills trade their 4th and a 5th to move back up to the end of day 2 if there is a player that they love. I expect them to pull 4 to 5 starters from the draft and hopefully some improved depth.

 

Who on earth would be so stupid as to trade a 2nd round pick for a 4th and 5th? On the trade value chart that is about 300 points for 110 points +/- 

 

Wouldn't we be calling for Beane's head if he did something that stupid?

[Jauronimo]

17 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

I never have agreed with this. 

 

Fill the holes on your team. 

 

The Bills are not good enough to grab another MLB in the 1st Round just because they rate him a 92 and the best WR available a 90. 

 

This team is depleted at almost every position. 

Teams that draft for need will continue to have many much need to replace mediocre starters.  Need is a tie breaker when deciding between two equally rated players in the draft.

[Straight Hucklebuck]

7 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

You kind of contradict yourself here. You say that “they basically need everyone but draft for need.” Good teams never draft for need. That’s what FA is for. The draft is for enhancing your talent level. 

I never have believed that the "good teams" aka the teams with a real QB just take the best available player. No they don't. The Steelers select players that fit their style of defense, as do the Ravens. 

 

I think what really happens is teams rank talent in Tiers, and then select based on need from the players left in a Tier. 

 

They know guys they ultimately want to move away from, contracts that are about to expire, players who are declining and they plan for it. 

 

 

[blacklabel]

2 hours ago, Elite Poster said:

I love how people bring up the "we have 10 picks" BS, and they are all late round picks. This regime just drafted and cut a guy drafted in the 6th this year. Lol.

 

If you're referring to Proehl, he was a 7th round pick, and one pick away from being Mr. Irrelevant. 7th round picks get cut all the time.

[Straight Hucklebuck]

15 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

That's exactly what teams that draft well do.

 

The only exception is QB, because if you don't have one, you should be drafting any QB that could potentially become a franchise guy.

 

 

Exactly.

The Bills aren't going to do that. 

 

One year after drafting Allen, drafting Hebert. 

 

Its nice to say, but nobody does that. 

6 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

Teams that draft for need will continue to have many much need to replace mediocre starters.  Need is a tie breaker when deciding between two equally rated players in the draft.

So if the Bills went CB, LB, NT in Rounds 1, 2, 3 you wouldn't object?

 

 

[blacklabel]

3 hours ago, PIZ said:

WR – Benjamin.  Terrible.

LG – Ducasse?  Seems more like a backup G to me.

C – Bodine?  Seems more like a backup center to me.

RB – McCoy.  I don’t expect him to be on the team in 2019.

RG – John Miller.  Need to get better here.

RT – Mills.  Need to get better here.

WR – Holmes.  Only OK at special teams.  Not a starter at WR.

 

(edit) QB - Peterman.  Anderson.  Not sure how I forgot this, but yes, probably both will not be on the roster next season.  We need a quality vet backup for Allen, and I would like to see another young guy that has some talent, to replace Peterman.

 

LB – Alexander.  Still a good player, but he is getting long in the tooth.

DT – Kyle Williams.  Retirement.

DE – Murphy.  Guy can’t stay healthy.

DE – Hughes.  Still a top player, but will he be traded?

CB – Gaines.  Need to get better here.

 

That is a ton of players.  Can the Bills fill these spots via FA and the draft?  Is it realistic to think the Bills can fill these spots with starters that will improve the team?  I think it is possible with the cap money ($91m) and draft picks (10 – below).

 

Benjamin, not great.

Ducasse, playing better than most think.

Bodine, serviceable, they could upgrade but maybe a full season in this offense will help him progress some.
Miller, not great.
Mills, again, playing better than most think.

 

Alexander, playing well for the role they have him in, providing valuable leadership/teaching to young guys like Edmunds & Milano. 
Williams, playing well this season, likely helping Harrison Phillips come along, and maybe now Jordan Phillips as well. Depending on how he finishes the season, the Bills will have a decision to make on re-signing him or not (Jordan Phillips, that is, I feel like Kyle retires after this season but if they finish the season on an uptick and they're able to make some decent upgrades in the off-season and if Kyle thinks they might be able to go for a playoff run, maybe he comes back, especially if the Brothers Phillips get more time in the rotation).

Murphy, does get hurt a lot, missed most of camp and pre-season and just went down with an injury Sunday but he's not bad when he can go.

Hughes, they've said it numerous times that they have him firmly in their future plans. They love the intensity he brings, he practices hard everyday, works his tail off, he's a good example of what the coaching staff wants to see from their players.

Gaines, not great, but they can't all be zingers. Maybe Dontae Johnson or Ryan Lewis come along and get better.

 

It's not as grim as you might think. And if they wanna keep adding to the DL and make it the strongest unit on the team, this next draft coming up is absolutely loaded with solid DL players. On the flipside, it's not a great year for receivers or offensive playmakers, which they really need.

 

Oh, and backup QB, yes, I'd like to see them move on from Peterman, kid just implodes whenever the real games start. Anderson, I wanted him signed earlier this season to fill that mentor role, it's a bummer he has to start right now. 

Edited October 25, 2018 by blacklabel

[thebandit27]

4 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

The Bills aren't going to do that. 

 

One year after drafting Allen, drafting Hebert. 

 

Its nice to say, but nobody does that. 

 

I didn't say that they would (or should).

 

Now, I wouldn't fault them if they did, but the point is this: if you don't have a franchise QB, and you don't have someone in the fold that you believe can become that guy, then that's what you draft first.

 

After that, you should be taking the best player that you can get your hands on.

 

Drafting for need causes teams to pass on better players, and almost always leads to a dearth of talent.

[McBean]

3 hours ago, PIZ said:

WR – Benjamin.  Terrible.

LG – Ducasse?  Seems more like a backup G to me.

C – Bodine?  Seems more like a backup center to me.

RB – McCoy.  I don’t expect him to be on the team in 2019.

RG – John Miller.  Need to get better here.

RT – Mills.  Need to get better here.

WR – Holmes.  Only OK at special teams.  Not a starter at WR.

 

(edit) QB - Peterman.  Anderson.  Not sure how I forgot this, but yes, probably both will not be on the roster next season.  We need a quality vet backup for Allen, and I would like to see another young guy that has some talent, to replace Peterman.

 

LB – Alexander.  Still a good player, but he is getting long in the tooth.

DT – Kyle Williams.  Retirement.

DE – Murphy.  Guy can’t stay healthy.

DE – Hughes.  Still a top player, but will he be traded?

CB – Gaines.  Need to get better here.

 

That is a ton of players.  Can the Bills fill these spots via FA and the draft?  Is it realistic to think the Bills can fill these spots with starters that will improve the team?  I think it is possible with the cap money ($91m) and draft picks (10 – below).

 

2019 draft picks:

 

Round 1: original pick.

Round 2: original pick.

Round 3: original pick.

Round 4: original pick.

Round 4:  additional selection acquired from the Kansas City Chiefs as part of Reggie Ragland trade.

Round 5: original pick.

Round 5:  additional selection acquired from the Oakland Raiders as part of AJ McCarron trade.

Round 6: original pick.

Round 7: original pick.

Round 7:  additional selection acquired from the Carolina Panthers as part of Kevon Seymour trade.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Allen, Dawkins, T White, T Johnson, Edmunds, Milano, H Phillips, Hyde, Poyer, J Phillips.

 

eveybody else can kick rocks

Edited October 25, 2018 by McBean

[BuffaloHokie13]

10 minutes ago, Mickey said:

Who on earth would be so stupid as to trade a 2nd round pick for a 4th and 5th? On the trade value chart that is about 300 points for 110 points +/- 

 

Wouldn't we be calling for Beane's head if he did something that stupid?

I don't think that's how anyone sees it playing out. Kirby specifically mentioned sneaking back into the end of day 2, as in late round 3. FWIW, based on last year's trade value chart picks 112 (16th in rd4) and 144 (16th in rd5) were worth pick 94 (30th pick in rd3). I suspect our pick will be better than pick 16, so value only goes up.

 

The other thing the Bills can do is use their later picks to improve their day 2 picks. Let's say we do end up with pick 94 from the above trade. We could then package that with pick 176 (16th in rd6) to get up to pick 86 or so.

[Jauronimo]

11 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

The Bills aren't going to do that. 

 

One year after drafting Allen, drafting Hebert. 

 

Its nice to say, but nobody does that. 

So if the Bills went CB, LB, NT in Rounds 1, 2, 3 you wouldn't object?

 

 

If those are the clear cut best players on the board, so be it.  Actual difference makers on the field is way better than getting the WR equivalent of Donte Whitner just because we have a need at that position.

[Straight Hucklebuck]

3 minutes ago, blacklabel said:

Oh, and backup QB, yes, I'd like to see them move on from Peterman, kid just implodes whenever the real games start. Anderson, I wanted him signed earlier this season to fill that mentor role, it's a bummer he has to start right now. 

 

This is something that WGR 550 has talked about all week. 

 

That Anderson should have been signed earlier, that you left yourself exposed by not having a veteran QB on the roster. 

 

And I got to tell you, I think this is something that just get repeated, but if you're trying to win games, it doesn't matter at all. 

 

 

The Bills tried to give a back up QB who "never got his chance to start" an opportunity in AJ McCarron. Two days into TC it was apparent that he was a checkdown artist. 

 

The Browns signed veteran journeyman Tyrod Taylor, he stunk and lasted two games. 

 

The Cardinals signed veteran Sam Bradford and he lasted two games before being yanked. 

 

The Bills signed veteran backup Derek Anderson. He threw 0 TDs and 3 Ints, and fumbled. 4 turnovers for a veteran that Josh Allen is "supposed to learn from". 

 

 

So what good does signing Anderson "earlier" do?

 

The fans say this year is all about sitting Allen and helping him "learn". 

 

But what really happens is a garbage washed up veteran is 0-2 and the screams get louder for the 1st Round Rookie. 

 

The same thing would have happened here in Buffalo. 

[Kirby Jackson]

29 minutes ago, Mickey said:

 

Who on earth would be so stupid as to trade a 2nd round pick for a 4th and 5th? On the trade value chart that is about 300 points for 110 points +/- 

 

Wouldn't we be calling for Beane's head if he did something that stupid?

3rd round is day 2. We are talking about using something like 106 and 143 to get into the 90’s. There are roughly 100 picks in the first 2 days. 

[sleeby]

As for the offense it would be easier to look at who is sure to stay on in 2019.

 

Josh A

Zay Jones

Dawkins

Ivory

 

Are there any other starters on that team who should be considered safe?  

[yungmack]

Number one priority is an NFL level QB. Not that Beane et al have shown any sign they know what one is.

[Mark Vader]

38 minutes ago, nedboy7 said:

You forgot McDermott. 

 

Conor McDermott is just a back-up tackle, no reason to cut him. 

[Straight Hucklebuck]

23 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

If those are the clear cut best players on the board, so be it.  Actual difference makers on the field is way better than getting the WR equivalent of Donte Whitner just because we have a need at that position.

I just don’t think you have any real evidence to support this, that “good” teams don’t draft for needs but the teams that are bad draft for need and it leaves them without talent. 

Edited October 25, 2018 by Straight Hucklebuck

[White Linen]

If we have a top 10 pick and there's not a WR worthy of the pick - I'm trying to trade down into the teens and identify a WR. 

 

If I can't get adequate compensation then I'm looking for a pass rusher with the pick.  I'm then looking to trade back into the first round to get a WR or I'm identifying a TE in the second.  

 

IMO, pass rusher and WR are the hardest positions to fill in free agency in terms of top tier #1 guys.   We need 4 WR's and it's going to be a daunting task - some Antonio Brown type of luck would be so helpful.  A guy to come from no where and be a real player.  

 

I spend my free agency money on a the offensive line, Golden Tate or John Brown (i'll over pay for either) and a corner.  Then fill in as many holes as possible with the remainder. 

[billsfan_34]

2 hours ago, Mark92 said:

Tom Brady was a 6th.  A pick is a pick.  Yes 1-4 round picks tend to be better but you never know.

#83 ring a bell?

[BillsClinton]

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

2 hours ago, billsherd said:

By the time offense gets fixed, watch for defense to suck. 

 

Well then everyone should  be thrilled around here, since all i hear is that's how it's done.

 

[John from Riverside]

3 hours ago, PIZ said:

WR – Benjamin.  Terrible. Absolutely needs to be replaced.  Not just because he is not a one but because he is a lazy player.

LG – Ducasse?  Seems more like a backup G to me. Is actually servicable.....but not good if the players around him are not good.  I actually think the smart thing to do would be to bring in a free agent LT and move Dawkins to LG where he might be all pro type good.

C – Bodine?  Seems more like a backup center to me. While they can get by with him.....I think they will look to replace him.

RB – McCoy.  I don’t expect him to be on the team in 2019.  I dont either....however if we had the OL beefed up then we could get by with Ivory and Murphy

RG – John Miller.  Need to get better here.  Is absolutely going to be replaced....but dont discount Teller here....AND we can find a free agent RG

RT – Mills.  Need to get better here.  Every year we talk about replacing him.....every year he ends up not being our biggest progem....if you put a excellent RG next to him you dont need to replace Mills but we should ALWAYS be looking to upgrade

WR – Holmes.  Only OK at special teams.  Not a starter at WR.  Not a fan....and we should be very focused on WR's this offseason

 

(edit) QB - Peterman.  Anderson.  Not sure how I forgot this, but yes, probably both will not be on the roster next season.  We need a quality vet backup for Allen, and I would like to see another young guy that has some talent, to replace Peterman.   Good with Anderson as the backup......we should draft another QB.....Peterman is history.

 

LB – Alexander.  Still a good player, but he is getting long in the tooth.  What we need to do is EXTEND this guy.....he is playing lights out

DT – Kyle Williams.  Retirement.  Kyle is going to retire but now not the player he was and his replacement is already on the team

DE – Murphy.  Guy can’t stay healthy.  When he actually  misses live fire games for us I will say different...but right now the guy is playing and  playing well

DE – Hughes.  Still a top player, but will he be traded?  Why trade him when he is still a very good pass rusher....lets add to our pass rush and KEEP him

CB – Gaines.  Need to get better here.  I never worry about corner under McD.....he knows how to find them

 

That is a ton of players.  Can the Bills fill these spots via FA and the draft?  Is it realistic to think the Bills can fill these spots with starters that will improve the team?  I think it is possible with the cap money ($91m) and draft picks (10 – below).

So as you can see...its not as many players as you might think....if we got MUCH better at some of these positions you would not even recognize that the team has some holes just like every NFL team does....the problem right now is we have TOO MANY holes

3 hours ago, PIZ said:

 

2019 draft picks:

 

Round 1: original pick.

Round 2: original pick.

Round 3: original pick.

Round 4: original pick.

Round 4:  additional selection acquired from the Kansas City Chiefs as part of Reggie Ragland trade.

Round 5: original pick.

Round 5:  additional selection acquired from the Oakland Raiders as part of AJ McCarron trade.

Round 6: original pick.

Round 7: original pick.

Round 7:  additional selection acquired from the Carolina Panthers as part of Kevon Seymour trade.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BuffaloBillsGospel]

3 hours ago, Elite Poster said:

I love how people bring up the "we have 10 picks" BS, and they are all late round picks. This regime just drafted and cut a guy drafted in the 6th this year. Lol.

 

We also drafted Matt Milano (5th round), Taron Johnson 4th round, by the logic that we have more late round picks should no team even try to draft players after the 3rd round?

[Elite Poster]

Just now, BuffaloBillsGospel said:

 

We also drafted Matt Milano (5th round), Taron Johnson 4th round, by the logic that we have more late round picks should no team even try to draft players after the 3rd round?

 

Matt Milano was garbage on Sunday (average to below average starter overall) and Taron Johnson has a couple nice tackles this year. My logic isn't to give up on later picks, its that we have not drafted great after the second round. Teams pluck RBs and WRs out of the later rounds and we are breaking the bank on Zay, Tolbert, Ivory, etc. It doesn't make sense.

[GunnerBill]

52 minutes ago, sleeby said:

As for the offense it would be easier to look at who is sure to stay on in 2019.

 

Josh A

Zay Jones

Dawkins

Ivory

 

Are there any other starters on that team who should be considered safe?  

 

I don't think Ivory or Zay are locks.

[Jauronimo]

37 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

I just don’t think you have any real evidence to support this, that “good” teams don’t draft for needs but the teams that are bad draft for need and it leaves them without talent. 

Strong point.  And what evidence do you possess that I have little evidence to support my opinion?  What evidence do you have in support of drafting for need?

 

Here's 3 time NFL executive of the year Bill Polian's thoughts on the matter.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/post/bill-polian-key-to-success-is-drafting-best-player-available/2012/04/24/gIQAGvLPeT_blog.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.d610995def9b

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, Elite Poster said:

 

Matt Milano was garbage on Sunday (average to below average starter overall) and Taron Johnson has a couple nice tackles this year. My logic isn't to give up on later picks, its that we have not drafted great after the second round. Teams pluck RBs and WRs out of the later rounds and we are breaking the bank on Zay, Tolbert, Ivory, etc. It doesn't make sense.

 

Milano had a poor game on Sunday (still better than Edmunds worryingly) but it was his first bad game of what has otherwise been an excellent sophomore season so far. I think he is an above average starter.

[John from Riverside]

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't think Ivory or Zay are locks.

I would definately keep Ivory.....a better offensive line in front of him platooned with another back.

 

The guy is a load.....has more excelleration then what was anticipated.....can catch....and is probably our best blitz pickup back

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

 

So if the Bills went CB, LB, NT in Rounds 1, 2, 3 you wouldn't object?

 

Depends who they are and who is on the board. That is precisely the point. Deciding on positions before players is the wrong way to think about it. We need more elite talent and more very good just short of elite talent. Not just more warm bodies who can be league average starters.

 

Another theory I know that Kirby particularly subscribes to is draft to the strength of the draft. This year that looks to be d-line. Might not be our number 1 need but it is an area where they can get top end talent.

[blacklabel]

25 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

 

This is something that WGR 550 has talked about all week. 

 

That Anderson should have been signed earlier, that you left yourself exposed by not having a veteran QB on the roster. 

 

And I got to tell you, I think this is something that just get repeated, but if you're trying to win games, it doesn't matter at all. 

 

 

The Bills tried to give a back up QB who "never got his chance to start" an opportunity in AJ McCarron. Two days into TC it was apparent that he was a checkdown artist. 

 

The Browns signed veteran journeyman Tyrod Taylor, he stunk and lasted two games. 

 

The Cardinals signed veteran Sam Bradford and he lasted two games before being yanked. 

 

The Bills signed veteran backup Derek Anderson. He threw 0 TDs and 3 Ints, and fumbled. 4 turnovers for a veteran that Josh Allen is "supposed to learn from". 

 

 

So what good does signing Anderson "earlier" do?

 

The fans say this year is all about sitting Allen and helping him "learn". 

 

But what really happens is a garbage washed up veteran is 0-2 and the screams get louder for the 1st Round Rookie. 

 

The same thing would have happened here in Buffalo. 

 

Solid take from the flip-side of this situation. 

 

For me, I would've liked Anderson to have been here earlier with the caveat that he was strictly in a mentor role and the only way he'd see the field would be if injuries happened to Allen or Peterman. I believe having a veteran guy like that would've been good for both young QBs.

 

Peterman has really turned into fool's gold, in a way. I mean, everyone saw how consistent he was and how well he played through camp and pre-season so based off of that, yeah, I think most coaches would feel comfortable with him as their #2. But then, for whatever reason, kid can't keep it together in real games. I mean, you could go back to the Chargers game last year and say, "They shoulda seen it coming!" but of those five INTs, only like, two were solely on Peterman. Others happened due to guys not catching the flippin' ball. They saw how he played in pre-season and figured he was worth keeping around and giving another chance to. 

 

I dunno... I think if Anderson had been here earlier, I'm still naming Josh Allen the starter. 

 

I feel like a lot of the struggles on offense can be pointed back to indecision on the part of the coaching staff. The OL was off to such a bad start because they tinkered with the lineup all pre-season. First it was Groy, then it was Bodine, let's get Teller some first team reps, nope he's not ready, back to Miller, is Conor McDermott ready to go? No? OK, back to Mills. Really, from the start of camp and pre-season, Dawkins and Ducasse were the only two who were regularly lining up with the first team, and consistently at LT and LG. The other three spots they kept shuffling around and they were less than a week away from the regular season before they named their starting center. I've said before during this season that they needed to have that stuff together a bit sooner than that in order to give those five guys a chance to find chemistry.

 

Combined with the indecision with the OL is the whiff of an evaluation they had with the rest of the offense. They obviously expected a lot more from KB. They keep saying Zay Jones is working hard and if you watch the tape, he is, he's getting open more regularly as of late, he's just not being seen consistently yet. They wanted to lean on the run game but they fell behind so early in too many games so they abandoned the run. The one week they do get McCoy going, it's followed up in the next week with a concussion for the guy, that's no one's fault, stuff happens. Charles Clay, they have not found a way to get him involved much. And the decision to roll with Peterman to start the season was a bad one.

 

Trial and error. That's how you learn, especially as a first-time HC. I know people are frustrated and expected more this season but really, they exceeded expectations last year so I think that placed some unrealistic expectations for this season. My expectation was, yeah, they're going to lose games. But I also had hoped that they could keep some of these games close or at least make it interesting. It is definitely troubling to see how many blowouts they've had. It seems like the message is getting through, players say they feel pretty close as a team, they're all rooting/playing for each other, which is what you want. But there have certainly been games where they all just looked like they've checked out. Looked like that in Indy for sure. I dunno, that fumble Clay had seemed like it just knocked the wind right out of their already shoddy sails. I'm also sure a lot of the team didn't really have the utmost confidence in Derek Anderson. No offense to him, but he was coming off the couch with a handful of practices under his belt, can't expect a lot in that situation.

 

I think long-term, they're pointed in the right direction. They've drafted pretty well so far. Jury is out on Allen, of course. Edmunds looks like he can be every bit the player they've expected. Phillips looks like he'll get better the more he plays. Taron Johnson has been a great find, pretty much the Matt Milano of 2018. Neal has a chance to provide solid depth and Teller likely has a chance to crack the starting lineup next season. Ray-Ray... I think he's an "on the bubble" guy at this point. And for 2017, can't complain with White and Dawkins. I think Zay is coming along, Milano was a steal, Peterman's a bum and Vallejo didn't work out, neither did Proehl. But so far, Team McBeane has drafted 14 players overall, they've cut two, will likely have to dump Peterman but still, they have four solid starters already with White, Dawkins, Edmunds and Johnson. We all hope Allen can become the guy, and we all hope Zay can turn the corner. Over the last decade, the Bills have always been a top-5 team in terms of rosters with the least amount of homegrown talent. McBeane is definitely on the right track to changing that and they're staying true to their word of building most of this roster through the draft and filling in other spots with some decent free agent signings.

 

I kinda rambled on there for a bit, my bad, but, eh... I think it'll be alright.

[Dr. Who]

10 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Depends who they are and who is on the board. That is precisely the point. Deciding on positions before players is the wrong way to think about it. We need more elite talent and more very good just short of elite talent. Not just more warm bodies who can be league average starters.

 

Another theory I know that Kirby particularly subscribes to is draft to the strength of the draft. This year that looks to be d-line. Might not be our number 1 need but it is an area where they can get top end talent.

At the top of the draft, I think you take elite talent over need. But if this team doesn't use the bulk of its resources in the draft and free agency to upgrade offensive talent this off-season, there is a problem imo.

[sleeby]

41 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't think Ivory or Zay are locks.

Zay is cheap next year though - may as well keep him and ditch the others.  Never know.  I'm not a fan yet but am rooting for the kid.  Anyhow, for the money he's worth another year to hope for change. . .he need not be a #1 or #2 in the squad.

[Kirby Jackson]

34 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Depends who they are and who is on the board. That is precisely the point. Deciding on positions before players is the wrong way to think about it. We need more elite talent and more very good just short of elite talent. Not just more warm bodies who can be league average starters.

 

Another theory I know that Kirby particularly subscribes to is draft to the strength of the draft. This year that looks to be d-line. Might not be our number 1 need but it is an area where they can get top end talent.

I’m not going to knock EJ but that draft was a perfect example. It was a combination of drafting for need in a draft with a terrible QB class. QBs naturally get pushed up the board but get pushed up even higher when the class isn’t good. So you are taking a 4th round project at pick 16. 

 

The opposite happens in a strong and deep class. You may get a DE this year at 37 that graded out like Davenport last year who cost the Saints 2 1sts. It is just a good (and deep) group. When the draft’s strength matches up with your needs you are in good shape. 

 

Regardless though you ALWAYS have to go talent over need. Need can break ties but talent has to come first. 

[Elite Poster]

49 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Milano had a poor game on Sunday (still better than Edmunds worryingly) but it was his first bad game of what has otherwise been an excellent sophomore season so far. I think he is an above average starter.

 

Milano has had a few good games and a few stinkers. That is to me, average. 

[ctk232]

4 hours ago, Elite Poster said:

I love how people bring up the "we have 10 picks" BS, and they are all late round picks. This regime just drafted and cut a guy drafted in the 6th this year. Lol.

That all you got? Something extremely common? We also nailed picks in the 4th and 5th the last two years across different FOs. The past two drafts have more players contributing and still on the team than we've seen from most of our prior drafts this decade, and the one before.

 

Having 10 picks isn't a guarantee, having 10 first round picks also isn't - albeit anyone would take those chances simply because of the larger pool of talent to pick from. But neither scenario is guaranteed to work statistically speaking. That being said, the reason why having more draft picks is beneficial really shouldn't be that difficult to understand:

 

1. You have a higher probability of finding more players that will contribute by selecting more players from the overall talent pool.

2. You give yourself capital to trade up in earlier rounds, if desired for extra talent, without having to give up picks that would force you to sit out a round or "sell the farm" to get one guy.

3. You give yourself comfort to trade back and either use even more picks, or package later rounds to trade up in round 2 or 3 if a player has fallen that far. Not a likely scenario fwiw, but one that you still have comfort within.

4. Allows you to bring more guys in via the draft, develop what talent is there on rookie contracts for cheap, and help to build a sustainable team for the future (kinda what we're trying to do now).

5. Can help give you comfort to not overspend in FA - something we've done before and are currently suffering from. By having more picks, you don't need to over-reach or overpay B list players as much as you do with a standard set or less (especially given our position needs).

 

I don't see how any of this is a bad thing. While I agree the second 7th round pick likely doesn't mean anything, we've hit consistently in each of our last two drafts across different FOs - including the 4th and 5th round. Nothing's guaranteed, but I'll take this over 7 picks any day.

[Straight Hucklebuck]

52 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Depends who they are and who is on the board. That is precisely the point. Deciding on positions before players is the wrong way to think about it. We need more elite talent and more very good just short of elite talent. Not just more warm bodies who can be league average starters.

 

Another theory I know that Kirby particularly subscribes to is draft to the strength of the draft. This year that looks to be d-line. Might not be our number 1 need but it is an area where they can get top end talent.

I think best player available is a catchy phrase. 

 

What I think really happens is the team sets up a big board with the overall rankings of every player. Then as the pick approaches they look at the grades of the remaining players, have a band they would like to stay within, a +/-, then select a player in that band that best fits with need. 

 

This is not passing on a 97 Cornerback to draft a 71 WR. 

 

Like everything else McDermott and Beane are going to tell you they are doing it all. They are planning for the future and in win-now mode. They are always going to publicly tell you they took the BPA. But what really happens is Stephon Gilmore walks out the door, we need a cornerback. We're done with Tyrod Taylor, we need a QB. We let Preston Brown walk, we need a MLB. And you match need with talent tiers. 

[thebandit27]

1 hour ago, BillsClinton said:

 

That movie remains in my top 10 of all time

[John from Riverside]

36 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Depends who they are and who is on the board. That is precisely the point. Deciding on positions before players is the wrong way to think about it. We need more elite talent and more very good just short of elite talent. Not just more warm bodies who can be league average starters.

 

Another theory I know that Kirby particularly subscribes to is draft to the strength of the draft. This year that looks to be d-line. Might not be our number 1 need but it is an area where they can get top end talent.

I think we can definately use another pass rusher.....

 

If we draft top 5 I would like to see a trade down so that our first pick can be best player available and hope that pick is best player available in a position of need we should be taking multiple stabs at WR, OL and we need to draft a QB and a RB

[BillsInWilmingtonNC]

4 hours ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

I never have agreed with this. 

 

Fill the holes on your team. 

 

The Bills are not good enough to grab another MLB in the 1st Round just because they rate him a 92 and the best WR available a 90. 

 

This team is depleted at almost every position. 

I feel like the Bills have honestly tried to do both by moving around (up/down) in the draft.  Trying to get the players that they love, that fill a need, and at the right spot in the draft.

[TigerJ]

I agree with the OP on most of the offensive players.  I think Holmes is OK as a role player, but the Bills wouldn't miss him if he were gone.  Depending on their contracts, I wouldn't mind keeping some of our current offensive line starters as backups, but upgrades at starter needs to happen at several spots, especially center.  There will be some age related chages on the defence, though noto necessarily all that you suggest.  I would be surprised if Peterman sticks with the team, but I would not be surprised if Andersonn hangs around for another season or two in a mentor/backup role.  I think a young QB will be on the PS next season.

[CookieG]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Depends who they are and who is on the board. That is precisely the point. Deciding on positions before players is the wrong way to think about it. We need more elite talent and more very good just short of elite talent. Not just more warm bodies who can be league average starters.

 

Another theory I know that Kirby particularly subscribes to is draft to the strength of the draft. This year that looks to be d-line. Might not be our number 1 need but it is an area where they can get top end talent.

 

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I’m not going to knock EJ but that draft was a perfect example. It was a combination of drafting for need in a draft with a terrible QB class. QBs naturally get pushed up the board but get pushed up even higher when the class isn’t good. So you are taking a 4th round project at pick 16. 

 

The opposite happens in a strong and deep class. You may get a DE this year at 37 that graded out like Davenport last year who cost the Saints 2 1sts. It is just a good (and deep) group. When the draft’s strength matches up with your needs you are in good shape. 

 

Regardless though you ALWAYS have to go talent over need. Need can break ties but talent has to come first. 

There are enough maxims being thrown around, and they are good ones..and they both boil down to "talent trumps need".

 

I just don't know if you can apply  them as rigid in all situations,. especially in the current situation. And a little further, prospect A over prospect B is not an all or nothing proposition.

 

Example...prospect A is a DE with a grade of 8.5, prospect B is an OT with a grade of 7.5.  And for the purposes of the ratings...let's say 8.5 is considered an all pro player and 7.5 is considered a fringe Pro Bowl player.

 

But...your team is already near the top in sacks but is at the very bottom of the league in pass protection, leading the league in sacks per attempt and has a pathetic run game.

 

This is where I think you get into a Bill Walsh maxim.  According to legend, when a scout would say something like, "a good prospect, but our draft position is too high for him." Walsh would dismiss the rating and say, "how would he help our team"?  (then he'd probably trade down).

 

In this case, who helps the team more? The higher rated DE help the team more than the lower rated, but still highly rated OT? I'd argue the latter.

 

Another example, let's say you consider this a weak WR class, with only 2 WR's you'd consider drafting in round 1 or 2. Its also a deep DL class with about a dozen draft worthy DL in the same rounds.

 

Considering that everyone else in the NFL probably knows about the WR class...do you consider a WR, knowing that if you wait, all prospects will be gone by the next round? 

 

One last maxim  is an offshoot of Belichick's catch phrase "situational awareness"...the one he preaches on a tactical level to his players all the time.  But it can also be applied to the team building level. 

 

And the situation is this...this is a historically bad offense that has been stripped with most of its talent. It needs to be made a priority. Just because you're drafting at a need position means the player selected will be a bust.