GG Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 With 5 of 6 picks going to the offensive side of the ball, look slike they went the best available athlete round In a very weak draft, with very bad draft placement, each of the guys looks to be slated to be an upgrade over last year's roster spot. Parrish -> Reed Everett -> Euhus Preston/Geisinger -> Pucillo/Sobieski King -> Greer Gates -> Smith/Williams We were not getting much production out of the first two guys on that list, and any improvement over that performance will be huge, as they were the critical holes in the roster. Frankly, If found that McBride's comparison of K Williams to Parrish is appropriate, and Bills have had trouble replacing Williams' slot role. Shaw was supposed to be that guy, and it was clear that Bledsoe locked in on him on 3rd downs constantly. But there was to much inconsistency from Shaw for the critical positioin he played. To me, I like Everett better than Matt Jones. Why are people getting hyped about a QB who'd never played a down as a TE, and not as much about a developmental TE who's actually played the position and filled some big shoes in a big program? Preston/Geisinger should add needed interior depth, but I wouldn't count on the pushing anyone out of the starting lineup. I've learned a long time ago not to get all crazed about the draft until training camp opens, and these guys get on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 With 5 of 6 picks going to the offensive side of the ball, look slike they went the best available athlete round In a very weak draft, with very bad draft placement, each of the guys looks to be slated to be an upgrade over last year's roster spot. Parrish -> Reed Everett -> Euhus Preston/Geisinger -> Pucillo/Sobieski King -> Greer Gates -> Smith/Williams We were not getting much production out of the first two guys on that list, and any improvement over that performance will be huge, as they were the critical holes in the roster. Frankly, If found that McBride's comparison of K Williams to Parrish is appropriate, and Bills have had trouble replacing Williams' slot role. Shaw was supposed to be that guy, and it was clear that Bledsoe locked in on him on 3rd downs constantly. But there was to much inconsistency from Shaw for the critical positioin he played. To me, I like Everett better than Matt Jones. Why are people getting hyped about a QB who'd never played a down as a TE, and not as much about a developmental TE who's actually played the position and filled some big shoes in a big program? Preston/Geisinger should add needed interior depth, but I wouldn't count on the pushing anyone out of the starting lineup. I've learned a long time ago not to get all crazed about the draft until training camp opens, and these guys get on the field. 317166[/snapback] That may be the case, but I still think LT is unfilled. Jason Peters? Anyone else have thw willies when thinking of a guy with a 6 wonderlic protecting our Qbs backside? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 That may be the case, but I still think LT is unfilled. Jason Peters? Anyone else have thw willies when thinking of a guy with a 6 wonderlic protecting our Qbs backside? 317171[/snapback] Joe, Why not Teague? I know he is no Donnie Greene, but he has played LT for a playoff team. I think that looking at the draft, that is why the Bills went with 2 interior guys. Of course, that does not mean that a trade or later June 1 cut might not be the answer either... Go Bills! RJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted April 24, 2005 Author Share Posted April 24, 2005 That may be the case, but I still think LT is unfilled. Jason Peters? Anyone else have thw willies when thinking of a guy with a 6 wonderlic protecting our Qbs backside? 317171[/snapback] It all depends on who was available at each pick. Since Bills picked 5 offensive players and not a single tackle, my educated guess is that every available tackle on the draft board was worse than what the Bills already have on the roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
its only real shh Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 Gates -> Smith/Williams who is smith? freddie?...hes a reciever I dont see everett as an upgrade over euhus, he's not the one whos gonna get cut, neufeld is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 It all depends on who was available at each pick. Since Bills picked 5 offensive players and not a single tackle, my educated guess is that every available tackle on the draft board was worse than what the Bills already have on the roster. 317180[/snapback] \ Exactly! I understand why people can be disappointed, but do not understand why folks want to think that TD was somehow capriciously overlooking legitimate picks. There had to be a draft board at OBD, not to mention extensive research on both players available and players already on the team, all of which helped determine the picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted April 24, 2005 Author Share Posted April 24, 2005 Gates -> Smith/Williams who is smith? freddie?...hes a reciever Fast Freddie was RB/WR in college but his role on Bills is largely ST, which is where Gates will get to compete. Plus, if Parrish is an able returner, it may give coaches some flexibility in deciding between Smith or Gates. I dont see everett as an upgrade over euhus, he's not the one whos gonna get cut, neufeld is. 317181[/snapback] Everett would be an upgrade, as I believe he will supplant Euhus as No. 2, and the roster gets better and deeper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sound_n_Fury Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 Everett -> Euhus 317166[/snapback] I actually like Euhas. I see Everett as a developmental guy who could turn into a nice speed, change of pace TE given a year of hard work in a pro system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assquatch Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 That may be the case, but I still think LT is unfilled. Jason Peters? Anyone else have thw willies when thinking of a guy with a 6 wonderlic protecting our Qbs backside? 317171[/snapback] I can't remember the last time a DE asked an LT a multiple choice question on his way to sacking the quarterback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b3x Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 I can't remember the last time a DE asked an LT a multiple choice question on his way to sacking the quarterback. 317195[/snapback] Phil Hansen was known to quiz opposing tackles ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cåblelady Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 King -> Greer 317166[/snapback] No love for Jabari? *sniff* *sniff* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
its only real shh Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 Fast Freddie was RB/WR in college but his role on Bills is largely ST, which is where Gates will get to compete. Plus, if Parrish is an able returner, it may give coaches some flexibility in deciding between Smith or Gates.Everett would be an upgrade, as I believe he will supplant Euhus as No. 2, and the roster gets better and deeper. 317189[/snapback] yeah, college part time rb but here he's never gonna see the backfield other then when we run a trick play or two, thats what i was talkin about not KR. i didnt know gates returned kicks, thought he was too big but i must be thinkin of shelton. euhus has a year under his belt, all he really needed to work on was his blocking and maybe route running. if hes improved those parts of his game i dont see us needing to put everett in as #2 just becuase we'd like more of shockey type TE, if hes not fully ready for the job. if by september everett is ready then by all means take it over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 I disagree, GG. My first reaction to yesterday's picks was the same as yours, however, upon reflection I do think ALL of our picks were about filling needs. Yesterdays picks filled a key NEED on offense - we NEEDED to bolster our 3rd down efficiency on offense. We NEEDED to shore up the middle of our offense, esp. with a young QB - he needs options in front of his eyes right when he drops back, and it's been YEARS since we've had a quality slot receiver or tight end. And, as I said yesterday, if you want a playmaking slot receiver who runs a 4.3 40 and has produced at a big-time program, you need to grab him on Day 1. Same with a super-athletic tight end from the same quality program. These WERE needs, and we took them when we had to. Today's picks were also about NEEDS - but again, you can fill up the trenches on Day 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. K Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 With 5 of 6 picks going to the offensive side of the ball, look slike they went the best available athlete round In a very weak draft, with very bad draft placement, each of the guys looks to be slated to be an upgrade over last year's roster spot. Parrish -> Reed Everett -> Euhus Preston/Geisinger -> Pucillo/Sobieski King -> Greer Gates -> Smith/Williams We were not getting much production out of the first two guys on that list, and any improvement over that performance will be huge, as they were the critical holes in the roster. Frankly, If found that McBride's comparison of K Williams to Parrish is appropriate, and Bills have had trouble replacing Williams' slot role. Shaw was supposed to be that guy, and it was clear that Bledsoe locked in on him on 3rd downs constantly. But there was to much inconsistency from Shaw for the critical positioin he played. To me, I like Everett better than Matt Jones. Why are people getting hyped about a QB who'd never played a down as a TE, and not as much about a developmental TE who's actually played the position and filled some big shoes in a big program? Preston/Geisinger should add needed interior depth, but I wouldn't count on the pushing anyone out of the starting lineup. I've learned a long time ago not to get all crazed about the draft until training camp opens, and these guys get on the field. 317166[/snapback] You are obviously too rational to be a Buffalo Bills fan. You should be ranting about "drinking the koolaid" or rending your shirt in agony like Job in the old testament. My only area of possible dispute with you is whether this seventh-round RB is an improvement over Shaud Williams, who I think looked mighty good in his brief appearances last season. I'm curious to see how the O-line plays out, but I am not in despair because we didn't draft a LT in the first day, or trade Henry for someone nobody else wants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted April 24, 2005 Author Share Posted April 24, 2005 I disagree, GG. My first reaction to yesterday's picks was the same as yours, however, upon reflection I do think ALL of our picks were about filling needs. ..... Today's picks were also about NEEDS - but again, you can fill up the trenches on Day 2. 317211[/snapback] I think we need a better replacement for the sarcasm smiley. This draft was all about drafting for need. It was damning to see the team ranking son ESPN - Defense #2 Offense #25. Thus, 5 players drafted on the scoring side of the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 I think we need a better replacement for the sarcasm smiley. This draft was all about drafting for need. It was damning to see the team ranking son ESPN - Defense #2 Offense #25. Thus, 5 players drafted on the scoring side of the ball. 317229[/snapback] Whoops. Sorry man, thought you were throwing your hat into the ring with DeeRay-JoeSixPack-ICE... too much cynicism on this Board. Glad we're in agreement! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 I can't remember the last time a DE asked an LT a multiple choice question on his way to sacking the quarterback. 317195[/snapback] You're right, but he should be smart wenough to understand some pretty complex blocking assignments and adjust on the fly, don'tcha think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wwovince Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 In my opinion the draft should be done as Best Player rated on your board not by need. FA should be used to fill the voids not the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assquatch Posted April 25, 2005 Share Posted April 25, 2005 You're right, but he should be smart wenough to understand some pretty complex blocking assignments and adjust on the fly, don'tcha think? 317245[/snapback] I agree 100%. My point is, those aren't on the wonderlic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted April 25, 2005 Share Posted April 25, 2005 It all depends on who was available at each pick. Since Bills picked 5 offensive players and not a single tackle, my educated guess is that every available tackle on the draft board was worse than what the Bills already have on the roster. 317180[/snapback] good points all, but more than LT it freaks me out a bit that we didn't draft a DT. maybe there weren't any who were any good, which would explain things, but all the same we're supposed to be believers in tim anderson despite the fact that he really never even made the field last year. shades of ahmad plummer->eric flowers and deion grant->travares tillman: the player selected immediately before anderson last year was a guy i wanted, maryland DT randy starks. starks played well for a rookie, as it so happens ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts