Cornerville Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 Personally I think Whitner is going to be an impact player on this defense who will make a couple of Pro Bowls in his career. As for convincing you now whether he is a good pick or now, anything anyone offers you now is opinion, just like mine. Who knows. Let's wait and see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syhuang Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 Do you think Bills could address their DT problem on the 2nd or 3rd round picks? After McCargo (26th pick), the next DT drafted was Claude Wroten at 68th pick. This implies a dropoff on the qualities between the top 3 and the remaining DTs. Could McCargo last till Bills' second round pick? From the reports after the draft, Giants was planning to pick McCargo at their 32th pick. How about drafting Bunkley at no.8? First, please refer the my earlier post to see how Bunkley is doing, Bunkley holding out. Second, Bills rated Whitner very high on their board, higher than Bunkley. Third, if Bills drafted Bunkley at no.8, they still needed to address the SS position on the 2nd or 3rd round. However, there's also a dropoff on safety after Jason Allen. I have grasped that concept... the question comes down to this: Would you rather have: A late first round pick? -or- A high 2nd and high 3rd rounder? If I was New England, I'd trade up (as they did for Chad Jackson). If I were Pittsburgh, I'd trade up (as they did for Holmes) Buffalo is in a much different situation... they need as many good, young players as possible. In that situation, I'd rather have the high 2nd and high 3rd. 727240[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 I'll convince you. We don't have the luxury at this point of selecting the "best player available". We have needs that can't be addressed in FA only. We have to get better quickly, and therefore must draft for need. Safety was a need in the new Tampa 2 style. If we didn't draft one with our early pick, we would have been SoL. I don't give a crap whether our pick was #8 or #18, we had needs to be filled and had little choice about it. 726928[/snapback] Actually, do DO have the need to select the best player available- its not a luxury. Free agency makes all players available to all teams at once. In the draft- you DON'T have that luxury- if you want to stock your team with talent, you have to use this philosophy in the the draft....otherwise, you end up with 2nd tier talent that isnt good enough at a need position anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 How about drafting Bunkley at no.8? First, please refer the my earlier post to see how Bunkley is doing, Bunkley holding out. 727264[/snapback] Has Whitner signed yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syhuang Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 Has Whitner signed yet? 727274[/snapback] Is he holding out? Does he have trouble picking up defense scheme? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 Is he holding out? 727279[/snapback] I don't know... camp is just around the corner though. My current take on both Whitner and McCargo is like most, to wait-and-see... but my whipping belt is ready. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 I have grasped that concept... the question comes down to this: Would you rather have: A late first round pick? -or- A high 2nd and high 3rd rounder? If I was New England, I'd trade up (as they did for Chad Jackson). If I were Pittsburgh, I'd trade up (as they did for Holmes) Buffalo is in a much different situation... they need as many good, young players as possible. In that situation, I'd rather have the high 2nd and high 3rd. 727240[/snapback] There's little question to me that if I was in the Bills situation in real life where I am running a business that is a football team and I have a need to fill starting SS and DT slots or my team has no shot whatsoever at putting a reasonable product on the field in 2006, I prefer having the 1st rounder to having the two later picks. I'm assuming that I have made a judgement that the top 3 DTs on the board are Ngata, Bunkley and McCargo (not necessarily in that order but the fact they are the top 3 and I judge no one else as having much potential at all to be a contributor at DT quickly to my team in 06 is the key). I also assume that I have made a judgement that not only are there only 2 SS with a reasonable chance at contributing immediatelt (Whitmer and Huff and again it does not matter for this consideration what order you have these two the key is that Allen is recovering from injury and 4th safety taken Bullocks I do not see as a contributpr immediately). If this is your judgment (which appears the Bills and the consensus generally have made) then my course is clear, I'm pretty sure the pool of likely first year contributors (and it is to be hoped they will be immediate starters) will be gone likely in the 1st and certainly before my 2nd pick. I see the key for me is to gain an additional pick in the 1st round. If I am lucky, when my pick rolls around at #8, no one has been taken at these two positions and I then try to trade down the #8 and move my second pick into the 1st round. The Bills did not get lucky as OAK snatched Huff at #7. I now have to decide how risk averse I am because the worse case for me is now someone snatches Whitmer if I trade down the #8 to get a pick in #10-20 but move my 2nd pick up into the 1stmove into the 1st round to balance the exchange (assuming I can find the partner (s) necessary to do all this). In real life, I actually have Whitmer rated as high as or higher than Huff and particularly since #9 DET was said to be interested in Huff, I almost certainly pick Whitmer now at #8. Since my hope of being in a position to make deals to move down from #8 and still get my second into the first so i can get both the DT and SS I need to compete and run my business in 06, I now need to bite the bullet and pick Whitmer and trade one of my 3rds to move up into the 1st and get one of the three DTs who can contribute in 06. That's what I do. I feel bad that it did not work out so I could get what I needed and then some, but I am pretty pleased with this draft as I used my extra 3rd to get both the SS and the DT I wanted whom I feel can contribute quickly. I would agree with you that I'd prefer more picks rather than one higher pick if I was not running a business that needs to put butts in the seats this year. We;ve gone 6 years with no playoffs and I owe it to my fans to compete next year as best I can. We wasted our time on the 3 year plans which are logical for building a winner during the TD regime. Reality forces me no question about it to try to compete for the long-term while maintaining a winner as best I can. I cannot have the luxury of another 3-13 season, even if that is the intelligent way to buil for the long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExWNYer Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 Please Someone convince me this was a good pick.726768[/snapback] Why does anyone need to convince you, Mel Kiper, Sean Salisbury, douchebag Adam Schein, et al that this was a "good pick"??? The kid hasn't even suited up yet. How the hell do you quantify him as good or bad without seeing him play for the Bills? Time will tell. All of these fugging so called "experts" are annoying and have an agenda...either selling magazines or filling air-time. Ignore them and judge, not pre-judge, for yourself. Is he holding out? Does he have trouble picking up defense scheme?727279[/snapback] He's not holding out. These players are all "slotted". As soon as the players drafted above him start signing, he'll ink with the Bills. Most of these things seem to shake out close to the eve of training camps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 I'd take one probowl caliber, starter over 2 (or even 3) "Cory Wire's" any day of the week and twice on Sunday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 And maybe, just maybe, Marv is ahead of the curve on this. He could be totally off base, but on the other hand, he does have more experience on the sideline than I do. So, it's it possible that he understands the importance of having a Safety like a Steve Atwater playing like a rattlesnake in the secondary. It could work out. Then again, it could blow up in his face. What's the percentage? You tell me. But he wanted a Banger there and thinks he got one. Remember, he had a real hard time getting to the big dance until he got Leonard Smith. I'll wait till the jury comes back. Frankly, I think it'll be fun watching. 727019[/snapback] Marv took the best player ont he board. Typically a defensive player is more likly to be a good pick than say a qb or rb that can't play at that level (Ki Juna Carter, Tim couch, Harrington). Defense doesnt change much, cover your man/zone and make the tackle. i have no doubt whitner can handle that. Kudos to marv for not taking leinart and wasting a huge opprutunity at a good player like whitner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 Marv took the best player ont he board. Typically a defensive player is more likly to be a good pick than say a qb or rb that can't play at that level (Ki Juna Carter, Tim couch, Harrington). Defense doesnt change much, cover your man/zone and make the tackle. i have no doubt whitner can handle that. Kudos to marv for not taking leinart and wasting a huge opprutunity at a good player like whitner 727352[/snapback] A safety was sure needed. As, of course, were linemen. I think they made a good pick with Whitner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgg Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 This is a rebuilding year. There is no way around that issue and Marv himself has admitted that. With that in mind, the draft should be treated as a way to build a solid foundation for many years to come. If the goal was to compete in the immediate year, then we would not have released Lawyer Milloy or Sam Adams, both of whom had some gas left in the tank. If you don't agree, ask Marvin Lewis and Rich McKay -- both respected, NFL personnel men from playoff teams who signed the aforementioned players to start in their resepctive defenses. If this represents an obligation to the fans to compete in the near-term, you simply don't release those guys with years left on their contract at a palpable price. But that was not the message sent to the fans. The message was that this team needs to get younger and build for the future. In my opinion, surrendering picks is not the way to go unless it is a can't-miss prospect. I would agree with you that I'd prefer more picks rather than one higher pick if I was not running a business that needs to put butts in the seats this year. We;ve gone 6 years with no playoffs and I owe it to my fans to compete next year as best I can. We wasted our time on the 3 year plans which are logical for building a winner during the TD regime. Reality forces me no question about it to try to compete for the long-term while maintaining a winner as best I can. I cannot have the luxury of another 3-13 season, even if that is the intelligent way to buil for the long term. 727314[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syhuang Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 This is a rebuilding year. A rebuilding year doesn't mean Marv should draft quantity over quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgg Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 But what if you can have both? In a draft as deep as this one, you can. A rebuilding year doesn't mean Marv should draft quantity over quality. 727486[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 I bought a Whitner jersey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 Has Whitner signed yet? 727274[/snapback] Has the 9th pick signed yet- there is a natural progression to signings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 Well, we are switching to the cover 2 defense- putting a premium on getting DB's who can play that defense (I have my doubts about Clements). This was a fantastic pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 But what if you can have both? In a draft as deep as this one, you can. 727489[/snapback] It looks like the Bills DID in fact feel like they got both aspects. I think most folks have to admit in this crapshoot called the draft they may well be right. It seems clear they had Whitner rated above Huff at safety and while overall most folks would agree that Davis, Hawk or D'Brick were better players it looks doubtful that folks take after Whitner and prior to the #18 pick where some had him ranked are clearly better players. I think the major factor in any BAP consideration is that the Bills do want to do both as the Bills being a business does not allow them to simply ignore their needs. They had a clear need caused by the cuts of Milloy and Adams to get a DT and SS in this draft they thought would contribute immediately. However, taking BAP into account, they should strongly consider taking the BAP even if he does not play these two positions. If Davis or Hawk were available there is a pretty good BAP case for taking them. However, which of the players taken from #9-20 or so would you say is the BAP they should have selected instead? I think there is no one on the draft board who is worth a #8 without the added supplement to their case of us having a need. Its interesting that many folks who argue that we woulds/shoulda/coulda picled a BAP instead of Whitner actually also argue we should have built the OL. This thought is based on their peception of NEED as best as I can tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 Fast somewhat strong and we needed someone to replace Milloy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 Has the 9th pick signed yet- there is a natural progression to signings 727525[/snapback] Someone is probably saying the same thing in Oakland or Detroit about Whitner... sooner or later, one of the teams has to step up & get it done, it might as well be the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts