K-gunner Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 Let's hope you don't ever make any judgements about any these players before 2009, or else you'd be a big hypocrite. This draft sucked a$$. 679104[/snapback] Are you a Bills fan at all? Because..your posts sure don't refelect it..at all.So quick to villify before anything has happened yet.Call Dr.Phil... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandius Posted May 1, 2006 Author Share Posted May 1, 2006 Would you willing to bet $100 that three years from now you are sure that Whitner, McCargo, Youbouty, Simpson et al suck ass? 679108[/snapback] Check the grades/writeups. I actually have nothing against these four as players. If I had to predict, Whitner will be very good, McCargo will be considered an underachiever, Youboty will be maddeningly inconsistent, and everyone will remember Simpson as the best value pick from this draft. This draft should've been so much more, though, and should've focused on the lines. I'm not sure how we can "bet" on that opinion, though. I guess I could put $100 on the Bills being a losing team for the next two years, money I'd desperately hope to lose. But I doubt I would. I really need to reiterate. Outside the context of rebuilding the Buffalo Bills, I have no problem with any of our first four players drafted. This is probably even a great draft for a team that has good lines and needs to bolster their secondary. Unfortunately... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 Check the grades/writeups. I actually have nothing against these four as players. If I had to predict, Whitner will be very good, McCargo will be considered an underachiever, Youboty will be maddeningly inconsistent, and everyone will remember Simpson as the best value pick from this draft. This draft should've been so much more, though, and should've focused on the lines more. I'm not sure how we can "bet" on that opinion, though. I guess I could put $100 on the Bills being a losing team for the next two years, money I'd desperately hope I lose. But I doubt it. 679114[/snapback] In any draft, of the top four picks, if you think that one player will be "very good" (Whitner), and a third round pick (Simpson) will be the best value/steal of the draft, meaning he is better than the guys above him, that means you yourself think two of four will be very good. That is hardly a "suckass draft", wouldn't you say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB2004 Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 1. Donte Whitner = D1. John McCargo = C- 3. Ashton Youboty = B- 4. Ko Simpson = B 5. Kyle Williams = C 5. Brad Butler = F 6. Keith Ellison = Incomplete, no opinion 7. Terrance Pennington = Incomplete, no opinion 7. Aaaron Merz = Incomplete, no opinion Overall Grade: D+ --------------------------------- 2006 PICKS --------------------------------- ---DONTE WHITNER: Surprise! The Bills must've watched the playoffs and saw how Troy Polamalu could affect a game and decided to get one of their own. I have nothing personal against Donte Whitner. In fact, I like him as a player A LOT. Here's a link to a post I made TWO WEEKS AGO praising a mock draft in which the Bills trade down and select Whitner at #17 overall: http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?showt...5195&hl=Whitner . The key there, though, is TRADE DOWN for value. Remember, Ed Reed was picked #24 overall while Polamalu was picked at #16 overall, and now Whitner has gone #8 overall. Look, Whitner is going to become a very good safety if healthy but he needs to become an All-Pro like Polamalu to justify this pick at #8 overall with no trade downs. With Philly and Denver both trying to trade up, we should've went ahead and accepted even a third rounder to trade down and still pick up Whitner for less salary; also, not that he has a great history of being right, but John Clayton reports that we could've gotten an extra second-rounder out of the trade from one of these teams...I would've loved to have picked up an extra second in a deep draft. Furthermore, Whitner had a knee injury his sophomore year that required a scope and kept him out of a couple of games. If you want to draft a slightly undersized safety in the top 10, I would want him to have a 100% perfect bill of health. After initially grading this pick an F, I've decided that it's too harsh a grade; an "F" should mean bad positioning AND player. Whitner is a very good player (but again, needs to become an All-Pro) that anyone who watched OSU saw was all over the field making plays, BUT the Bills didn't leverage the value of their draft position. Still, the huge positive out of this pick is that we should never have to see Matt Bowen or Coy Wire as a starting safety in our lineup. Whitner is also allegedly a great leader and hard-working person with much character, something that we need in the locker room and can't be assessed by just watching games. ---JOHN MCCARGO: McCargo has pretty good upside and fits the Cover 2 well with his quickness. This wasn't a reach; I think the first round is where most teams that use small defenses have him slotted. I have nothing against John McCargo but again, I have a problem with the strategy we used on this pick. I hate that we traded away a third rounder in a deep draft to move up and get him. If it were up to me, I would've kept that pick and let the draft come to me at #42 overall; if McCargo didn't fall to 42, take offensive line help instead and then use both third rounders on the defensive line. There are other good DTs out there that fit our defense. I like Jonathan Lewis a lot... Jesse Mahelona... we didn't NEED McCargo enough right then and there to trade up for him when you balance that choice against our MULTIPLE roster holes and a deep draft. When a draft is deep and you have multiple holes, you want to preserve and gain as many picks as possible, and I think the Bills did a poor job with that with both the Whitner and McCargo picks. Furthermore, as with Whitner, McCargo does not have a clean bill of health and it remains to be seen if he can be durable in the NFL at his position. Note also that McCargo likely will not start but rather rotate with Tripplett at the 3-tech/undertackle position. We still need to find ourselves a more stout 1-tech/overtackle/nose type DT from this draft. Because McCargo does address the lines, and because we're not screwing up with a top 10 pick, this second round grade is a bit higher than the first round grade. ---ASHTON YOUBOTY This pick was pretty good value because of Youboty's upside. He has the good size/speed/athleticism that people look for in a CB and is a good hitter but at the same time, let's not overrate this kid. He's boom or bust--good upside, but he could become a complete flop as well (unlike Whitner, who will at least be good). He really isn't a first round value based on game play and it'll probably be awhile before he can be trusted to make good reads in a cover 2 zone scheme. OSU fans can attest that he had a much better sophomore year than junior year, and actually, some teams in '05 (i.e. Minnesota) specifically picked on him all game long for big plays. He's a project, which is fine because he comes from a good lineage (OSU DBs), and because we have time to develop him behind Clements, McGee, and King. I don't like ignoring the offensive line the first day, though. Cornerback is the deepest position in this draft and we could've gotten a good prospect in the second day especially since it's not a pressing concern for us like the lines are. That needs to be taken into account when you grade this pick. ---KO SIMPSON Well, it's quite obvious that the Bills are unhappy with how Vincent and Bowen/Wire project long-term to being Cover 2 safeties (as they should be). Simpson is a good value pick, period, even though this isn't an immediate need for the Bills. Very good upside and ball skills, but as with Youboty, his impact will probably be a couple of seasons down the line after he gets used to zone concepts. ---KYLE WILLIAMS Blah. They just drafted Tim Anderson again, which isn't terrible. Anderson's not a BAD player and neither is Kyle Williams. Great motor, durability, and intangibles. I was just hoping to get somebody with good upside. ---BRAD BUTLER Yuck. No upside whatsoever. ---KEITH ELLISON No opinion ---TERRANCE PENNINGTON No opinion ---AARON MERZ No opinion 674625[/snapback] Until we see them play, the grade is incomplete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodnarb Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 There's a reason you're not paid to share such opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syhuang Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 Let's hope you don't ever make any judgements about any these players before 2009, or else you'd be a big hypocrite. This draft sucked a$$. 679104[/snapback] Don't worry, I never judge young players before they're several years in the league. Hope some day you'll learn it's not smart to grade a draft before any of the rookies plays a NFL game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtj6 Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 You cannot grade this draft yet, have any of you guys seen them play on our defense in the NFL? NO, so stop saying we had reach picks and that we didnt address our needs, I thought Mcnally was known for developing later pound Olinemen. Give this team a chance we filled positions of need and added depth, not to mention theres still gonna be free agents avaliable and posibly even more because of cap casulties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandius Posted May 1, 2006 Author Share Posted May 1, 2006 In any draft, of the top four picks, if you think that one player will be "very good" (Whitner), and a third round pick (Simpson) will be the best value/steal of the draft, meaning he is better than the guys above him, that means you yourself think two of four will be very good. That is hardly a "suckass draft", wouldn't you say? 679122[/snapback] I meant Simpson will be the Bills' best value pick, not this entire draft's best value pick. But yeah, he'll be a good safety. Like I've said before, outside the context of rebuilding the Buffalo Bills, I have no problem with any of our first four players drafted. This is probably even a great draft for a team that has good lines and needs to bolster their secondary. I think it "sucks" that we drafted two fewer useful linemen than we could've and should've. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-gunner Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 This is probably even a great draft for a team that has good lines and needs to bolster their secondary. Unfortunately... Our SAFETY position is nill! Nada,nothing...Nate is two steps out the door...what the hell do you expect.Yeah add the BEEF to the DL that will stop McMichael from catching a 15 yard pass on a third and ten...or Chris Chambers torching you for 200 yards..because your safety's are a non factor....at all.They did nothing at that position.Both were great players in their prime..i wont say they were not.But god damn ..if you thought that that position was locked up..i'd like to know what games you watched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 I meant Simpson will be the Bills' best value pick, not this entire draft's best value pick. But yeah, he'll be a good safety. Like I've said before, outside the context of rebuilding the Buffalo Bills, I have no problem with any of our first four players drafted. This is probably even a great draft for a team that has good lines and needs to bolster their secondary. I think it "sucks" that we drafted two fewer useful linemen than we could've and should've. 679148[/snapback] If you believe what you just posted I find it hard to believe that you just posted what you did. This team has some significant holes. If you really thought that all of them could have been filled in one draft, or that if you were the one pulling the trigger on this draft that you could have selected three sure fire starters and contibutors, I am very impressed with your football acumen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandius Posted May 1, 2006 Author Share Posted May 1, 2006 If you believe what you just posted I find it hard to believe that you just posted what you did. This team has some significant holes. If you really thought that all of them could have been filled in one draft, or that if you were the one pulling the trigger on this draft that you could have selected three sure fire starters and contibutors, I am very impressed with your football acumen. 679163[/snapback] No, you have me all wrong. I can dig up a post I made a month ago that said we're not going to be able to fill all our holes with this draft. I know that--it's obvious. It's the holes that we chose to fill that I have a problem with. I would have eschewed fixing the secondary entirely for fixing the offensive line and getting at least one more useful defensive lineman out of this draft. You can't build a team from the perimeter in. It's ass-backwards and won't be successful, and I think you know this. You do realize that either Craig Nall or JP Losman is going to be our QB this year, right? You do realize that whoever wins that battle, his development into a competent QB over the next couple of years is going to be a key to this team's future, right? You do realize that we have several other young skill players on offense that we've invested high draft picks and millions into, right? McGahee, Evans, Parrish, Euhus/Everett, Davis, Reed, etc. Given all this, PRIORITY #1 of this draft should have been the offensive line. The development of these players will continue to be stunted until we can runblock and passblock at least adequately. We needed to invest more draft picks into the offensive line in order to help bolster the team's development of its young players. It's just good business sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NDBills Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 You have to admit that Youboty and Simpson were absolute steals at the positions we selected them. I agree the OL should have been addressed earlier, but I like the idea of building up the defense. We had such a great defense in prior years that was among the best in the league. Although Michael Irvin would disagree, defense wins championships. Well, hopefully defense will keep us semi-competitive... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandius Posted May 1, 2006 Author Share Posted May 1, 2006 You have to admit that Youboty and Simpson were absolute steals at the positions we selected them. I agree the OL should have been addressed earlier, but I like the idea of building up the defense. We had such a great defense in prior years that was among the best in the league. Although Michael Irvin would disagree, defense wins championships. Well, hopefully defense will keep us semi-competitive... 679186[/snapback] Youboty and Simpson were good values but I don't think I'd characterize them as absolute steals. DBs were arguably the deepest position in this draft so it was nice but not surprising that we got good value in the third and fourth. I agree that defense wins championships but I still believing improving the secondary ranks behind improving the o-line and d-line for reasons listed above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayFinkle Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 I remember the euphoria of getting Mike Williams. 675022[/snapback] It is all about preceived draft day value. More than likely the Bills could have landed the players they did and had two additional day 1 picks. I haven't really seen anybody saying the guys they drafted couldn't play ball, they just weren't good value picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 I know one guy who doesn't feel defense wins championships: Dwight Adams. Some of the cliches in NFL are so funny."You win with defense." If your special teams and the offense is no good, forget it. You better make sure all three parts of the engine work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1billsfan Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 Youboty and Simpson were good values but I don't think I'd characterize them as absolute steals. DBs were arguably the deepest position in this draft so it was nice but not surprising that we got good value in the third and fourth. I agree that defense wins championships but I still believing improving the secondary ranks behind improving the o-line and d-line for reasons listed above. 679318[/snapback] They've been trying to improve the areas your talking about: Offensive line addressed - Bills sign Fowler C and Reyes OG, Preston will be the other OG. Defensive line addressed - Bills signed Triplett DT, draft a new starter in McCargo DT and backup Williams DT So when the FS and SS positions were the gaping hole in the D this season (which there would have been a high probability of), you'd be able to not rip Marv and Co. for failing to address this area in the off season? Yeah right. BTW, before sitting down to grade any team's draft you need to wait a couple of years at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 I know one guy who doesn't feel defense wins championships: Dwight Adams. Some of the cliches in NFL are so funny."You win with defense." If your special teams and the offense is no good, forget it. You better make sure all three parts of the engine work. 679427[/snapback] I love DA, but how many did he win again?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 Offensive line addressed - Bills sign Fowler C and Reyes OG, Preston will be the other OG. 679431[/snapback] How is this addressing the need? Just because these guys may (or may not) be better than Anderson, Teague et al...doesn't mean they're long term solutions at those positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 So when the FS and SS positions were the gaping hole in the D this season (which there would have been a high probability of), you'd be able to not rip Marv and Co. for failing to address this area in the off season? Yeah right. Suppose Marv had traded down with his first round pick, and had taken Mangold. Then with his two second-round picks, he'd taken one offensive lineman, and one defensive lineman. Regardless of what he did from that point forward, I don't think you'd see a lot of people ripping him; either now or during the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornerville Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 How is this addressing the need? Just because these guys may (or may not) be better than Anderson, Teague et al...doesn't mean they're long term solutions at those positions. 679445[/snapback] The moves for Reyes and Fowler POTENTIALL have filled the need...just like Ferguson and Mangold POTENTIALLY fill the needs as well. Can we all just wait and see??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts