What Will It Take For You To Consider

[Kelly the Dog]

Why? Why?  Why did the first two picks need to be a DT and a SS?  Were there no needs elsewhere on this team? 

 

Say the first two picks had been used on a Phil Hansen-like DE to line up opposite Schobel, and a solid LT or OG who'd be an above-average starter for the next ten years.  Would picks like those be such a tragedy?  Or say those first two picks had involved an OLB who significantly upgraded the Jeff Posey spot, and a TE who'd be a notch or two below Antonio Gates.  Would that be so terrible? 

 

If you accept the logic that the Bills should have locked in on those two positions--SS and DT--with their first two picks, then yes, the Whitner/McCargo selection makes sense.  But I see no reason at all to buy into this inital premise.  Why on earth should the Bills lock into the SS and DT positions when there's so much need to improve elsewhere?  Other than Peters, who are the Bills' linemen?  Who is the DE who will line up opposite Schobel? 

 

If Whitner plays at a Pro Bowl level, taking him at #8 overall makes sense.  But if he merely turns out to be an average or somewhat above-average starter, then it was a mistake for the Bills or any other team to take him in the top 15.  There were just too many other ways that draft pick could have been put to use for this team.

712015[/snapback]

 

Ummmm... because they actually looked at the players available in the first round of the draft? Because they looked at the biggest need we had (unable to stop the run) last year not to mention losing Sam Adams. Because they signed Reyes to play guard right before the draft. Because SS is a big need in this defense and they decided to jettison Milloy who couldn't play it and saw that Whitner could excel in it. It wasn't like they didnt discuss other positions or who was going to be available.

 

I'm sure if there were 3-4 clear cut outstanding OT prospects to be had in the first round they would not have come to this conclusion, or if D'Brick somehow fell to them they would likely have gone to Plan B. But they had a pretty good idea of what were their biggest needs and who was likely going to be there. If you think a DE is a bigger need on this team than a DT you don't watch a lot of football.

[Orton's Arm]

Answers:

1. Because Marv decided that was how he was going to go. He's building the team the way he wants to and you don't get a vote in the process.

2. See Answer #1.

You win. Marv and his staff are the only ones with votes, so there's no point in discussing this, or any other, Levy decision. In fact, there's no point in having a discussion board at all. So your victory here means you have to stop posting now.

[Orton's Arm]

But they had a pretty good idea of what were their biggest needs and who was likely going to be there. If you think a DE is a bigger need on this team than a DT you don't watch a lot of football.

I'll grant that other than Ferguson, no LT deserved to go anywhere near 8th overall. However, the Bills could have chosen to address their offensive line by trading down and taking Mangold somewhere in the middle of the first round. Not that this is the only strategy they should have considered, but it was certainly a viable one.

 

But the main thrust of your argument is that the Bills should address their biggest needs first. You seem to be implying that addressing the most urgent needs first is more important than maximizing the value of each and every draft pick. This, I believe, is our biggest area of disagreement.

 

If I were in charge of rebuilding this team, I'd start by creating a vision of what the team should be like in 2007 or 2008. This vision wouldn't include Coy Wire starting at SS, but neither would it include Kelsay or Denny starting at DE. It probably wouldn't include Reyes, Villarrial, or Gandy as starters either.

 

Over the course of the rebuilding project, I'd look for the most value-laden ways to replace the players that are with the players that should be. "Value-laden" doesn't always mean trading down. It does mean that if you stay where you are, or if you trade up, you'd better be getting a guy who's a real difference maker. If that's genuinely what Levy believes Whitner will be, fine. But even then, he'd have to be awfully pessimistic about the players available in the middle of the round for his refusal to trade down to make sense. Odds are you can trade down and still get Whitner. If he's not there, who's to say Mangold or some other player wouldn't have as good a career as Whitner's? Plus you've got a second round pick from Denver to upgrade another position from the way it is to the way it should be. The way I'd think about it is this:

 

Value of Whitner: 10

Value of next-best option likely to be available at #15: 8

Value of a second-round pick: 4

 

Stay at #8

Value = Whitner (10) * 100% probability of getting him = 10

 

Trade with Denver

Value = (Whitner (10) * 70% probability of getting him) + (next best option (8) * 30% probability) + value of a second round pick = 13.4

[Kelly the Dog]

I'll grant that other than Ferguson, no LT deserved to go anywhere near 8th overall.  However, the Bills could have chosen to address their offensive line by trading down and taking Mangold somewhere in the middle of the first round.  Not that this is the only strategy they should have considered, but it was certainly a viable one.

 

But the main thrust of your argument is that the Bills should address their biggest needs first.  You seem to be implying that addressing the most urgent needs first is more important than maximizing the value of each and every draft pick.  This, I believe, is our biggest area of disagreement.

 

If I were in charge of rebuilding this team, I'd start by creating a vision of what the team should be like in 2007 or 2008.  This vision wouldn't include Coy Wire starting at SS, but neither would it include Kelsay or Denny starting at DE.  It probably wouldn't include Reyes, Villarrial, or Gandy as starters either. 

 

Over the course of the rebuilding project, I'd look for the most value-laden ways to replace the players that are with the players that should be.  "Value-laden" doesn't always mean trading down.  It does mean that if you stay where you are, or if you trade up, you'd better be getting a guy who's a real difference maker.  If that's genuinely what Levy believes Whitner will be, fine.  But even then, he'd have to be awfully pessimistic about the players available in the middle of the round for his refusal to trade down to make sense.  Odds are you can trade down and still get Whitner.  If he's not there, who's to say Mangold or some other player wouldn't have as good a career as Whitner's?  Plus you've got a second round pick from Denver to upgrade another position from the way it is to the way it should be.  The way I'd think about it is this:

 

Value of Whitner: 10

Value of next-best option likely to be available at #15: 8

Value of a second-round pick: 4

 

Stay at #8

Value = Whitner (10) * 100% probability of getting him = 10

 

Trade with Denver

Value = (Whitner (10) * 70% probability of getting him) + (next best option (8) * 30% probability) + value of a second round pick = 13.4

712058[/snapback]

Mangold is a center. They signed a FA to a pretty decent contract to be their center. That would have been foolish. Sure you can argue that Whitner was a reach or not worth the 8th pick. We had 117 threads on that already. They obviously thought he was, and they had a plan for the draft and for their defense.

[JAMIEBUF12]

not much......................i already think whitner is a great pick! not a glamorous pick ,but one of those picks that as the season goes on the announcers calling the games will be talking about how much "upside" whitner has and how the bills did good in getting a player who was already working out with pro players.you watch the same jerks that were dissing the bills for picking him will be writing articles on either how the bills got lucky on this one or how this is a guy td woulda picked...we will want to puke hearing this but at least there will be a good buzz going on with a player "we" drafted that was a reach.......go whitner and go bills in"06

[Fla Bills Fan]

I disagree.  If your QB is merely average for a starter, he may well be worth the 8th overall pick.  But typically SS is considered a lower-impact position than most.  No SS is worth 8th overall unless he's a special player.  I don't care who else was available, or what defensive tackles were available where, or any of that other stuff.  The Bills had more holes than a pound of Swiss cheese.  A team in that situation can't afford to spend the 8th overall pick on a SS, unless it gets a real difference maker in return.

711925[/snapback]

I agree with you, but if a team takes a RT (at #4) or a DT at #8 such as Bunkley or Nagata they also need to be a difference maker. Fat Mike was TD's biggest ( pun intended) mistake. We will have to wait and see who has more impact Bunkley, Nagata or Whitner/McCargo.

[The Jokeman]

I'm not suggesting you plagiarized, but this is essentially the same analysis offered by Pat Kirwan to discuss the Bills' decisions on draft day.  It all depends upon whether you like Whitner/McCargo better than Bunkley/name-your-safety.  The picks are tied together and should not be viewed as independent events.

711893[/snapback]

Any draft should be considered tied together and not independent events. I have stated many times on this board that a draft is about the best collection of players not necesslary the best players each round. As I'll admit after the 1st round I was very upset with the Bills draft but as the draft went on it got better because of the additions of Yobouty and Simpson.

[Pyrite Gal]

If I were in charge of rebuilding this team, I'd start by creating a vision of what the team should be like in 2007 or 2008. 

712058[/snapback]

 

I think you answered your own question as to why the first two Bills picks were going to be an SS and a DT and not geared toward the important tasks of builing an OL or solving QB issues for the long term.

 

I think the botomline driving decision making is that while you have a vision focused on 2007 or 2008, Ralph and his employee Marv have a vision that is focused on 2006.

 

Like you I think they realize that this team will not have even a snowballs chance of making the SB this year, and almost certainly not even make the playoffs.

 

However, i think that you differ from Ralph in that his personal pride as a team owner makes winning now a priority for him it may not be for a more far-minded thinker. He made the choices to trust in Butler who for whatever reasons did not resign with the Bills and he hired TD in a flash to address this opening. This hire proved to be a disaster if you count making the playoffs as a sign of success. He appears willing to take chances to try to get back soon rather than build for the long term even if those chances are small, that an intelligent longer-term thinker such as yourself would not take.

 

Another difference between Ralph and you (and likely between Golden Boy marv and you) is that while you have a vision which plays out in 2007 or 2008 is that actuarially while they will probably still be in the same positions regarding the Bills at that point, there are no guarantees they will even be on the planet. I think the future is now for them based on wanting to put butts in the seats every year in their business and wanting to win while they are breathing in a way that does not even allow them to invest in a strategy which will beging paying off in 2007 or 2008 rather than right now.

 

They established a virtual certainty that the first two picks were going to be an SS and a DT when they cut Milloy and Adams. When these moves were made any thoughts of the draft being geared toward taking the best available player (even if a mutant like Davis had somehow slipped to #8 or a great player at a loaded position for starters like Hawk had slipped, we likely were going to pick an SS and DT.

 

This team and the now would have been so bad with the team moving to the Cover 2 with pass coverage liability Wire as the best SS choice on the roster and Anderson being the lead DT to run stop so Triplett can use his penetration skills, the die was cast.

 

I think the answer to you question of why would they chose an SS and DT when you longer term team building logic pointed looking elsewhere is that the braintraust simply has different time frames for their logic than you do.

[Rico]

This team and the now would have been so bad with the team moving to the Cover 2 with pass coverage liability Wire as the best SS choice on the roster and Anderson being the lead DT to run stop so Triplett can use his penetration skills, the die was cast.

713363[/snapback]

But Anderson still is the lead DT to run stop.

[Orton's Arm]

I think the answer to you question of why would they chose an SS and DT when you longer term team building logic pointed looking elsewhere is that the braintraust simply has different time frames for their logic than you do.

You're probably right, and that's too bad. I really want Ralph to have a Super Bowl ring before he dies, but he won't be getting one in 2006. If there's any element at all of sacrificing the long-term for the short-term--and I believe there is--it will lessen Ralph's chances of getting that ring in the future.

[BuffOrange]

Bill,

I agree. Above average player in his 2nd year and Pro Bowl caliber (who cares whether he actually makes it) by his 3rd seems perfectly fair for what they used to get him.

 

As for some of these other comments: I disagree with the implication that relative to their positions, Roy Williams is a much better player than A. Winfield. Christ, int's aren't everything, some of it's luck, he's gotten some in Minnesota, and Williams is no great shakes in coverage.

[BuffOrange]

If you think a DE is a bigger need on this team than a DT you don't watch a lot of football.

712053[/snapback]

 

Pretty stupid comment IMO.

[Nanker]

You win.  Marv and his staff are the only ones with votes, so there's no point in discussing this, or any other, Levy decision.  In fact, there's no point in having a discussion board at all.  So your victory here means you have to stop posting now. 

712054[/snapback]

Au contraire mon ami, it is not I who is running a crusade against the man. And discussion is only enjoyable when it is more productive than masturbation.

[Pyrite Gal]

You're probably right, and that's too bad.  I really want Ralph to have a Super Bowl ring before he dies, but he won't be getting one in 2006.  If there's any element at all of sacrificing the long-term for the short-term--and I believe there is--it will lessen Ralph's chances of getting that ring in the future.

713380[/snapback]

 

I actually tend to be a future is now kind of guy myself when it involves other people's money and investments.

 

While my persomal investment strategies revolve around concepts like getting rich slowly and pay yourself first and arcane tactics like dollar cost averaging, I am quite happy to see Ralph run the team I root for with a strategy that passes up a long-term team building strategy which is better than short term tactics but still has a small chance of success to see the team roll the dice for a strategy that is more likely to be competive sooner, but has even a smaller chance of ultimate success.

 

The Bills are rolling the dice that:

 

1. Jauron can bring to bear the same D skills which brought him NFL Coach of the Year honors to somehow run an effective D with a plan of making the Cover 2 work with undersized DTs.

 

A. I like the older skill players we have at DB and the younger talented players we have acquired for them to teach lessons to by example and by word.

B. I like the active talented skill starters we have at LB that will have to do a great job of reading plays, know opponents tendencies and figure whether to emphasize run stopping behind an underweight DL, or pass coverage in the mid-zone undernesth the CB press coverage and S centerfield duties. Particualry with the acquistion of Watson i like the depth at LB if TKO is slow to come back.

C. I do not know enough about football to see how Jauron/Farrell are gonna stop the run with our undersized penetrating DTs and our high motor DEs.

 

However, Jauron has forgotten more about making a D work than even the most football literate TSW poster remembers and he MAY make this work.

 

2. The ST performs as well as they have the last two years.

 

This seems quite possbile as Marv emphasizes the import and drafted and signed folks with ST in mind.

 

3. The O will find someone to run things from JP, Holvomb and Nall and has a ton of speed from the WRs so that it is possible they can do their version of the the high-flying St. L crowd that Jauron came from. A key here is that WM will need to show similar skills as a receiver that he has shown as the fastest RB top gain 2000 yds rushing in Bills history.

 

As this O will also have to hit paydirt with an OL that has better starters today IMHO than they had last year (if someone wants to claim that MW and Bennie Anderson will be sorely mssed feel free) but a key for the Bills will be not only for Jauron, Farrell, Fairchild and April to be very good but for this team to be very lucky with injuries as there are not proven good back-ups yet on the Ol or at RB.

 

It seems quite conceivable to me that this team should be competitive in what I guess will be 13 of 16 games. If we get lucky and that works out then we will see how this funny shaped ball bounces and whether Phil Luckett and his ilk blow the call on a few coin flips in ways that advantage us.