nick in* england Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 You know, so what if the Ravens took Whitner? Or Detriot? Where the Bills drafted him, he's going to have to be the next Ronnie Lott. I hope he is that good, but if he's just an average to slightly above average player that fills a hole in a particular defensive system, then one has to ask if he was truly the only player out there that could fill that hole. If Whitner was taken by somebody else, the Bills should've had some other option. The problem is this wrong-headed thinking that there were no other options and, especially, that there were no other needs on this team. We've been tearing Tom Donahoe a ragged new orifice for his luxury picks like Roscoe "Lil Big Man" only to see the new regime go for a pure cover-2 system safety. 679715[/snapback] No no no. Your reasoning goes that any player picked in Round 1 of the draft (for arguments sake I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say picks above and including #8) has to be the second coming of the greatest player at that position. Just plain untrue. In today's NFL (Not For Long) you have to draft what you need to succeed. If you are running a C2 Def and you have a hole at S, you draft a C2 safety. If you need a 1 gap DT, you draft a 1 gap DT. Doing anything else sets you up to fail, because your personnel will not fit your system. Football today in the NFL is about systems and chemistry. You pick guys who will work well in your system, not embarrass you off the pitch and work hard in the film room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 May I please direct you to Marv Levy's press conference following the Whitner pick. In case you don't go there, I'll ask the following, "Who was the Steelers' best player last year?" "Which player on Steelers' defense did the OCs have to account for on all downs?" "Who was the best player on Pats' D when they won the Superbowls?" Since we're walking down memory lane, who was the last safety who ran a sub 4.4 - 40? Was it Rod Woodson? Would he be worth a top 10 pick? 680960[/snapback] Even if Whitner does turn out to be the next Ronnie Lott, it is tough for a team as weak up front as the Bills to justify using 2 of their next 3 picks on more defensive backs. You read the remarks by Adams (and thanks very much btw ). He, in no uncertain terms told us how to build a football team and chasing little guys, we remain. The thing is, we are losing while doing so. It makes no sense imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick in* england Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 This draft was DEEP and the Bills didn’t take advantage of that fact. 680528[/snapback] Deep in the sense that there were a lot of players with grades that factored to be anywhere between Rds 2-4. In my view there was a lot of big gaps talent wise in this draft - and you were just as likely to be labelled a reacher if you dropped down than if you took players you needed in the position you originally earned. The Bills took advantage of the upper echelon players they valued at a couple of positions and thus avoided the big talent gaps from the top 2-3 players at a position. In doing so we ended up with 4 guys with 80+ talent/prospect ratings in positions of need. By trading down into this deep draft we could have ended up with lots of players of lower value/talent/prospect in positions we didn't really need. And what's the point in that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 No no no. Your reasoning goes that any player picked in Round 1 of the draft (for arguments sake I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say picks above and including #8) has to be the second coming of the greatest player at that position. Bzzzzt. Wrong. That is not what I'm saying. Just plain untrue. In today's NFL (Not For Long) you have to draft what you need to succeed. If you are running a C2 Def and you have a hole at S, you draft a C2 safety. If you need a 1 gap DT, you draft a 1 gap DT. Doing anything else sets you up to fail, because your personnel will not fit your system. If you think SS is the only position the Bills needed to fill, then this makes perfect sense. But, if you think that is true, you're kidding yourself. The Bills will not win the Super Bowl this year on the back of Donte Whitner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick in* england Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 Even if Whitner does turn out to be the next Ronnie Lott, it is tough for a team as weak up front as the Bills to justify using 2 of their next 3 picks on more defensive backs. You read the remarks by Adams (and thanks very much btw ). He, in no uncertain terms told us how to build a football team and chasing little guys, we remain. The thing is, we are losing while doing so. It makes no sense imo. 680963[/snapback] Bill - I get your point - it's bang on. But look at the guys we drafted and picked up in FA. Taken as a package - you've got to feel a little more positive that the big men are being addressed. Fowler, Reyes upgrade the OL right away. Gibson is potentially an imapctful pickup too. Factor in the draft picks on the OL and there is a healthy addition and address to the OL. Look at the DL - Triplett is a sound pick up. McCargo fits the scheme too. Tim Anderson is a developing prospect and we still have a shot at June 1 cuts to address the DL further. I get your point - but I also think that the baby steps taken towards the lines add up to a couple of big strides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick in* england Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 Bzzzzt. Wrong. That is not what I'm saying.If you think SS is the only position the Bills needed to fill, then this makes perfect sense. But, if you think that is true, you're kidding yourself. The Bills will not win the Super Bowl this year on the back of Donte Whitner. 680969[/snapback] That looked like what you are saying. And of course SS wasn't the only need. But with Matt Bowen and Coy Wire as your only players at the position you know you need to do something serious. Additionally - IIRC the NFL only allows you to pick one player per pick, so unless you understood differently, you can only do one thing at a time. McCargo was the pickup to address another need in round 1 - so what's the big deal? And don't forget - the Winstons dropped wayyyy down the draft, so with Da'Brick gone, who are you going to pick to help the OL at #8? Reyes changed our stratgey... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 Fowler, Reyes upgrade the OL right away. 680970[/snapback] A lot of people thought bennie Anderson would address the OL issues right away before last season as well. The fact of the matter is, these guys are second-tier talents at best or else their respective teams wouldn't have let them walk. It certainly couldn't have been about money, like the case was with hutch and bentley. So making a statement like the above is grossly irresponsible IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 Even if Whitner does turn out to be the next Ronnie Lott, it is tough for a team as weak up front as the Bills to justify using 2 of their next 3 picks on more defensive backs. You read the remarks by Adams (and thanks very much btw ). He, in no uncertain terms told us how to build a football team and chasing little guys, we remain. The thing is, we are losing while doing so. It makes no sense imo. 680963[/snapback] I think this point has been handled before, but I'll pile on. Bills brought in an army of OL FAs to compete this year, along with WRs. These guys have real NFL experience, and I highly doubt that Bills would be better off today if they used more 3rd-4th Rd picks to add to OL fodder than perhaps adding DBs who will have a solid shot at starting. I've yet to see a convincing argument that shows me that Eric Winston is better than Mike Gandy, or the remaining OGs were better than Reyes, Bennie, Villareal or Preston. We could have traded up to get Mangold. But then you would have a guy, who has an upside over Fowler, but a monsterous hole at DT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 We could have traded up to get Mangold. But then you would have a guy, who has an upside over Fowler, but a monsterous hole at DT. 680994[/snapback] Or, we could have traded down and taken Joseph, and got some extra picks to boot. I am guessing that we could have still brought in a safety. We did anyway!!! Yes, this does depend on having a willing partner, but there were 2 qbs left, which would appear to make a trade much more likely if the Bills wanted to go that route. I know nothing about Fowler nor do I pretend to. As for Reyes, I am glad he is here but I'm puzzled by the fact that Carolina was willing to part ways with him to let 3rd round pick step in. What I do know is that teams rarely let go of their best blockers. Minn. made Hutch the highest paid OG of all time, and Seattle was willing to match. So, if we can't get the top blockers as ufas, and we are loathe to draft them, how DO we get top blockers to Buffalo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 May I please direct you to Marv Levy's press conference following the Whitner pick. In case you don't go there, I'll ask the following, "Who was the Steelers' best player last year?" "Which player on Steelers' defense did the OCs have to account for on all downs?" "Who was the best player on Pats' D when they won the Superbowls?" Since we're walking down memory lane, who was the last safety who ran a sub 4.4 - 40? Was it Rod Woodson? Would he be worth a top 10 pick? 680960[/snapback] This is nice irony. Marv gets it. He's out there selling and hustling the importance of the SS position. He's out there talking about All-Pro safeties of the past and present. The implications are patently obvious: the Bills think Whitner is an elite strong safety, a game changer, maybe not-quite Ronnie Lott but someone that will make a huge impact in games on Sunday. He's ... what All-Pro's name do we want to use? ... the next Polamalu, the next Ed Reed, the next John Lynch, the next Rod Woodson? (Personally, the Woodson comparison makes no sense to me.) Yet, we have some of the faithful defenders posting that the position Whitner was drafted makes no difference, attacking any suggestion that the bar should be set high, and implicitly trying to lower the bar as much as possible. Can you go much lower than "if Whitner is better than Coy Wire this is a great pick"? (If he's not better than Coy Wire and Coy Wire turns out the long-term starter, this pick was a disaster.) Maybe throwing the Ryan Leaf comparison out there, I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 That looked like what you are saying. See my last post in this thread. And of course SS wasn't the only need. But with Matt Bowen and Coy Wire as your only players at the position you know you need to do something serious. Additionally - IIRC the NFL only allows you to pick one player per pick, so unless you understood differently, you can only do one thing at a time. McCargo was the pickup to address another need in round 1 - so what's the big deal? The deal is they used 3 picks to fill two positions. The same two positions could have been filled and we could've added, probably, 2 more picks. That means we're short 3 total picks and our margin for error is minimized. As everyone is so happy to report, if the 2 picks work out, it's all good. But, if they don't work out, what then? And don't forget - the Winstons dropped wayyyy down the draft, so with Da'Brick gone, who are you going to pick to help the OL at #8? Reyes changed our stratgey... If your happy with Reyes as the OL fix, then, well, ok. (Tom Donahoe went to this same well often enough too.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 See my last post in this thread.The deal is they used 3 picks to fill two positions. The same two positions could have been filled and we could've added, probably, 2 more picks. That means we're short 3 total picks and our margin for error is minimized. 681063[/snapback] Huh? Whitner is a SS, Simpson is a FS and Youboty is a CB. Three guys, three needs, three different positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 "He's ... what All-Pro's name do we want to use? ... the next Polamalu, the next Ed Reed, the next John Lynch, the next Rod Woodson?" (Personally, the Woodson comparison makes no sense to me.) 681047[/snapback] Woodson was drafted at #10 in 1987. The Bills picked Shane Conlon at #8 that year. Woodson had a heck of a career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDG Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 Yes, this does depend on having a willing partner, but there were 2 qbs left, which would appear to make a trade much more likely if the Bills wanted to go that route. 681009[/snapback] Uh... doesn't it make it *less* likely, since if one of them gets taken you can still hope to get the other? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick in* england Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 Huh? Whitner is a SS, Simpson is a FS and Youboty is a CB. Three guys, three needs, three different positions. 681067[/snapback] I'm glad I'm not the only one that doesn't follow the logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 Woodson was drafted at #10 in 1987. The Bills picked Shane Conlon at #8 that year. Woodson had a heck of a career. 681069[/snapback] Except that Woodson was drafted to play cornerback and played it for ten years before moving to safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDG Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 A lot of people thought bennie Anderson would address the OL issues right away before last season as well. The fact of the matter is, these guys are second-tier talents at best or else their respective teams wouldn't have let them walk. It certainly couldn't have been about money, like the case was with hutch and bentley. So making a statement like the above is grossly irresponsible IMO. 680991[/snapback] Actually it is simply an accurate statement of how bad Teague and Anderson were last year... ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 This is nice irony. Marv gets it. He's out there selling and hustling the importance of the SS position. He's out there talking about All-Pro safeties of the past and present. The implications are patently obvious: the Bills think Whitner is an elite strong safety, a game changer, maybe not-quite Ronnie Lott but someone that will make a huge impact in games on Sunday. He's ... what All-Pro's name do we want to use? ... the next Polamalu, the next Ed Reed, the next John Lynch, the next Rod Woodson? (Personally, the Woodson comparison makes no sense to me.) Yet, we have some of the faithful defenders posting that the position Whitner was drafted makes no difference, attacking any suggestion that the bar should be set high, and implicitly trying to lower the bar as much as possible. Can you go much lower than "if Whitner is better than Coy Wire this is a great pick"? (If he's not better than Coy Wire and Coy Wire turns out the long-term starter, this pick was a disaster.) Maybe throwing the Ryan Leaf comparison out there, I suppose. 681047[/snapback] Trust me, the irony isn't lost on me. It's kind of like berating the Bills for rebuilding the line with Tuten Reyes, and berating them for not drafting more Tuten Reyeses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDG Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 Even if Whitner does turn out to be the next Ronnie Lott, it is tough for a team as weak up front as the Bills to justify using 2 of their next 3 picks on more defensive backs. 680963[/snapback] That's very disingenious, as the likelihood of projecting to an eventual starter drops off dramatically round-by-round. We'll have to see how Yobouty's career plays out in comparison to Jason Spitz and Rashad Butler - but those are the only two other offensive linemen taken in the third round. In the 4th round, you're looking at guys like Joe "Holy" Toledo who played TE in college, Chris Whimper who went very late in the round, and Jahri Evans from that football factory of Bloomsburg State University. I think Ko Simpson's future in the League looks better than any of those three. I don't know about you, but I'd rather draft a guy who is going to play this year, and projects to be an eventual starter in 1-2 years than draft the next Marques Sullivan or Jamie Nails simply because we *had* to get another warm body on the offensive line. JDG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 Except that Woodson was drafted to play cornerback and played it for ten years before moving to safety. 681075[/snapback] However, Woodson was a FS from Purdue when he was drafted. I'm sure you get Marv's gist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts