Don Banks first round losers

[Billsguy]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writ...s.losers/1.html

 

Apparently Clayton, Banks, King, Kiper, etc. all agree that the Bills "overpaid" for lower rated talent.

 

I think losing the 2nd and 3rd round picks plus the loss of additional picks that were offered to trade down were HUGE tactical and strategic mistakes.

 

The players drafted might be good, but that is not the point. A fact that is lost apparently on The Stadium Wall.

 

The point is the Bills potentially could have had those same players and 4 more picks!!!!

 

Bad strategy, BIG mistake.

[John from Riverside]

Do they know for a fact that other teams behind the bills didn't want to snag Dante and McCargo?

 

Draft Lienhard? If they had ANY credibilitiy up to that point they lost it.......it was discussed for an hour how Matt L. didn't have the long ball arm....and we are going to have him play in Buffalo in the Winter?

 

Say what you want about JPL....he has a CANNON to cut through the Buffalo wind in December......

[syhuang]

Do they know for a fact that other teams behind the bills didn't want to snag Dante and McCargo?

677322[/snapback]

 

Right, the words they used were "could have", "probably", and "maybe". How do they know the players would be still available several picks later?

 

Last time I checked, they were not in ANY of the war rooms just like all the fans.

[KOKBILLS]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writ...s.losers/1.html

 

Apparently Clayton, Banks, King, Kiper, etc. all agree that the Bills "overpaid" for lower rated talent.

 

I think losing the 2nd and 3rd round picks plus the loss of additional picks that were offered to trade down were HUGE tactical and strategic mistakes.

 

The players drafted might be good, but that is not the point. A fact that is lost apparently on The Stadium Wall.

 

The point is the Bills potentially could have had those same players and 4 more picks!!!!

 

Bad strategy, BIG mistake.

677315[/snapback]

 

Teams Draft in different ways based on philosophy...It's that simple....Marv's philosopy is still about the same as it ever was... If The Bills like a Player at a Need Position, and he's on the Board, they are not going to chance it unless another Team blows them away with a Trade offer...A bird in hand philosophy so-to-speak...

 

Other Teams trust their Scouting Departments in a different way by adding Picks when they can, and assuming a Player will be there that they like when it's their turn...You can get burned that way as well, but you get more chances to score...If you score on most of them you'll improve faster...

 

Both philosophies have worked...Both have failed...

 

The Experts can say what they will, the chances of McCargo being there at #42 were slim and none assuming he was healthy, and the Bills Doctors say he's 100%...The Bills gave up 5 more points than the Trade Chart calls for to move up for McCargo, so they did not get robbed either...And once again The Bills really liked this Kid and DT was a major Need...

 

At this point in time it is impossible to say the Bills "overpaid" for lower rated Talent because not a single one of these Kids have Played a Down. The Bills got 3 Decent Prospects in 3 Rounds for a Defense that was brutal Last Season...Each of these Prospects were higher Rated on some Boards, lower on others. Kiper and Mayock both like Whitner...Mayock said McCargo is perfect for the Bills New D...Some felt Youboty was a late 1st-Early 2nd Round Prospect... Think anyone would argue now if Ed Reed was Drafted at #8 Overall in 02 , or if Jamal Williams went #26 in 98? Of coarse not...But at the time...different story...

 

Personally I would have liked to see what the Bills could have grabbed by Trading Down and stockpiling Picks, but I'm not going to assume they screwed up because they did the opposite...Just going to have to ask the Experts to wait and see if these Kids can Play in the NFL...

[ax4782]

This was not a huge tactical mistake. The Bills lost one pick, as they wanted to use the second rounder to get McCargo anyway. They essentially gave up a third round pick to get a very solid player at position of need. I went to NC State and saw McCargo play. This was not a mistake, this is a guy who was undervalued on a lot of boards and the Bills were smart to take him. Whitner would have been taken by Detroit. They were looking to take Huff or Whitner in the first round and only took Simms because their top two choices were off the board. The Bills would not have done better with any other players. Ngata is too slow and takes plays off, and Bunkley's PQs and stats at Florida State were good, but McCargo's would have been similar if he had not been injured. Also, McCargo played at three positions for three seasons on the NC State defense which moved Williams, Lawson and McCargo around during different situations. With a need at all places on the DL, McCargo will likely start somewhere on the line this season and his speed and size will make him an immediate impact player. This has been a good draft. Marv know how to win and I think we should give him the benefit of the doubt, until circumstances tell us otherwise.

[jarthur31]

Until these experts can prove to me, w/o a shadow of a doubt, that we would've still had the first 2 picks in the draft later, they really should STFU!

 

They really are in the wrong business. They should call up Dionne Warwick and set up her witchy infomerials again.

[CaliforniaCheez]

After 97 picks of the 3 rounds only 4 DT's have been taken. 3 in the first round and 1 bad character guy in the third round.

 

Some would say McCargo would be available later and others would say there are few quality DT's in the draft and the Bills had to jump in to get one.

 

Many draft guides 2nd and 3rd round DT's are still on the board after day one.

 

Did teams not want DT's or were there really few quality DT's in this draft?

[SDS]

Until these experts can prove to me, w/o a shadow of a doubt, that we would've still had the first 2 picks in the draft later, they really should STFU!

 

They really are in the wrong business.  They should call up Dionne Warwick and set up her witchy infomerials again.

677351[/snapback]

 

I'll chose your post to jump in here...

 

what chaffes me about this analysis is that we are NOT a team with 1 or 2 needs. We are a team with 11 or 12 needs. The Bills are a pisspoor team that has a long way to go before they start contending for a 4 team division, let alone a championship.

 

We needed a shotgun in this draft, not a rifle.

 

Locking in on one or two players was , IMO, a mistake. The opportunity cost was large in picking Whitner and McCargo. We need talent. Lots of it. On offense. On defense. Front lines, back lines, skill players and grunts. Whitner and McCargo may end up being great players, but we are in desperate need for a dozen guys with talent. We missed the opportunity to address many more of these needs than we did.

[MDH]

Locking in on one or two players was , IMO, a mistake.  The opportunity cost was large in picking Whitner and McCargo.  We need talent.  Lots of it. On offense. On defense. Front lines, back lines, skill players and grunts.  Whitner and McCargo may end up being great players, but we are in desperate need for a dozen guys with talent.  We missed the opportunity to address many more of these needs than we did.

677444[/snapback]

 

Exactly what I've been saying. The Bills lost value because they fell in love with a few players. A team with this many holes can't afford to fall in love with specific players.

[Astrobot]

If you were the head coach, and you knew the prototypical player that the Cover 2 required -- fast CB-like safeties--, and you looked at your roster, and you saw Milloy-Vincent-Wire-Baker, what would your first pick be? Beyond Huff-Whitner, there were flaws in every other Safety.

[Tcali]

I'll chose your post to jump in here...

 

what chaffes me about this analysis is that we are NOT a team with 1 or 2 needs.  We are a team with 11 or 12 needs.  The Bills are a pisspoor team that has a long way to go before they start contending for a 4 team division, let alone a championship.

 

We needed a shotgun in this draft, not a rifle.

 

Locking in on one or two players was , IMO, a mistake.  The opportunity cost was large in picking Whitner and McCargo.  We need talent.  Lots of it. On offense. On defense. Front lines, back lines, skill players and grunts.  Whitner and McCargo may end up being great players, but we are in desperate need for a dozen guys with talent.  We missed the opportunity to address many more of these needs than we did.

677444[/snapback]

I really think you are wrong. We were so pathetic at safety we needed to shore up that position.Even if we would have drafted Mario,dbrck,and Hawk that wouldnt have been able to make this a good D because of our glaring glaring weakness at safety. Now we have good safeties,good corners, good LBs and an almost average D line.--Well done Marv.

[SDS]

If you were the head coach, and you knew the prototypical player that the Cover 2 required -- fast CB-like safeties--, and you looked at your roster, and you saw Milloy-Vincent-Wire-Baker, what would your first pick be? Beyond Huff-Whitner, there were flaws in every other Safety.

677458[/snapback]

 

and if you were the HC and looked at your secondary and then looked at your 30+ MLB, your star OL with the torn tendon, and the slow as crap other OL? And then you looked at you DL and saw empty spots where players have left and the remaining ones that generated little pass ruch and couldn't stop the run? and then you looked at an offense which was one of the WORST in Bills history? An inadequate OL, inadequate TEs, one decent receiver, one decent RB and marginal QBs?

 

So, after looking at all that - I'm not so concerned about filling the safety position at all costs.

[Tcali]

I really think you are wrong. We were so pathetic at safety we needed to shore up that position.Even if we would have drafted Mario,dbrck,and Hawk that wouldnt have been able to make this a good D because of our glaring glaring weakness at safety. Now we have good safeties,good corners, good LBs and an almost average D line.--Well done Marv.

677463[/snapback]

Ok--i didnt mean DBrick

[Lurker]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writ...s.losers/1.html

The point is the Bills potentially could have had those same players and 4 more picks!!!!

677315[/snapback]

 

This thinking only works if you fall for the pre-draft hype and BS that passes for analysis in the months leading up to the draft. It happens every year, but most folks (including myself) conveniently forget that each time the draft rolls around. Some kind of funky "group think" psychology thingy, I guess.

 

I'll admit, I fell for it to on the Whitner pick. But after doing some more reading on the guy, he looks like a very solid pick. The draft guru's of the world will tell you that there's a big diffierence in value between the #8 pick and #14, but in reality there isn't. So "overpaying" is a nice theoretical concept, but one not so evident once the players take the field.

 

I'm disappointed we didn't get any stud OL guys, but I like all three players and have not read a bad thing about any of them--in fact, the PFW Draft Guide (I know, I'm citing a source I just slagged ) used the term "All Pro" in their writeup of Whitner and "Pro Bowl potential" for Youboty. Boy, that would be great if they develop that way.

[BillsFan Trapped in Pats Land]

The Bills would never had room on the roster for 10 picks, let alone 14.

[1billsfan]

The biggest loser was Leinart. Banks losses all cred with his "story" after failing to not only put him on but to have him at the top of the list. 40 million big ones is was most pundits have said. So Denver had a good draft? They picked a guy that won't be playing until 2008 (not smart when you're a win now team). San Diego picked a player that has had only 1 start in college. The list can go on and on. No one knows what these players will do including the players themselves.

 

I liked our first day draft a lot. I was worried about our holes at SS and DT and now I'm not worried anymore. I see what the Pats, Fins and Jets did and I think we gained a lot of ground after yesterdays picks.

 

I can't wait for todays festivities!

[DeLuca1967]

The biggest loser was Leinart. Banks losses all cred with his "story" after failing to not only put him on but to have him at the top of the list. 40 million big ones is was most pundits have said. So Denver had a good draft? They picked a guy that won't be playing until 2008 (not smart when you're a win now team). San Diego picked a player that has had only 1 start in college. The list can go on and on. No one knows what these players will do including the players themselves.

 

I liked our first day draft a lot. I was worried about our holes at SS and DT and now I'm not worried anymore. I see what the Pats, Fins and Jets did and I think we gained a lot of ground after yesterdays picks.

 

I can't wait for todays festivities!

677493[/snapback]

 

I would love for you to go into further detail. The Jets did a great job of addressing their offensive line. While the Bills were reaching the Jets were taking care of business. And both the Pats and Fins are so far ahead of the Bills it's not even fair. They can draft differently then the Bills because they have less needs. They are fine tuning their teams not rebuilding. No ground was gained. If anything ground was lost. The Jets offensive line will be better. The Bills defensive line can not say the same thing.

 

Maybe someone should tell Marv it's 2006 not 1990. He got the boot because the game had passed him by. Nothing in FA or this draft has shown he has caught back up.

[rnmac]

Folks, the draft isn't over. Everyone knows that the meat and potatoes comes today. Many a solid player comes in the later rounds. Let's wait and see.