Tipster19 Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 I'm sure that nobody around here forgot the national heat that Marv took when he drafted Whitner at the #8 spot. It looks like the Falcons are going to take S LaRon Landry with their first pick. If they do, what do you think the draft gurus will think about Atlanta's selection of a Safety with the #8 pick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rafter Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 I'm sure that nobody around here forgot the national heat that Marv took when he drafted Whitner at the #8 spot. It looks like the Falcons are going to take S LaRon Landry with their first pick. If they do, what do you think the draft gurus will think about Atlanta's selection of a Safety with the #8 pick? Marv took heat because Whitner was projected as a mid to late 1st. Landry is projected as a top 10 by many, so I wouldnt expect them to take any heat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tipster19 Posted March 30, 2007 Author Share Posted March 30, 2007 Touche. That's a fair reply. I do remember the gurus were saying that the rule of thumb though is that it is still too high for ANY Safety. True or false? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 The beef people had with the Whitner pick is that they felt that Bills could have traded down for 2 No. 1s, and still got Whitner later on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rafter Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 Touche. That's a fair reply. I do remember the gurus were saying that the rule of thumb though is that it is still too high for ANY Safety. True or false? Not really rule of thumb for a safety. Most the analysts that were bashing the bills were projecting them to take Huff (who was taken right before us). Whitner was considered the #2 safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tipster19 Posted March 30, 2007 Author Share Posted March 30, 2007 The beef people had with the Whitner pick is that they felt that Bills could have traded down for 2 No. 1s, and still got Whitner later on. Well, I have to wonder how accurate they would have been. There was also talk that there were other team(s) behind the Bills' pick that were interested. I also think that we had a more bigger need then for a Safety than the Falcons have now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 and did it really matter in the end? the team that took huff is picking # 1 we are picking 12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 Well, I have to wonder how accurate they would have been. There was also talk that there were other team(s) behind the Bills' pick that were interested. I also think that we had a more bigger need then for a Safety than the Falcons have now. I think the folks whose views adhere to the statistical rule of thumb are choosing that over instead adhering to reality in the NFL. Particularly with the increasing adoption of the Cover 2 and Tampa 2 scheme (run by such teams as the Bills and SB champion Colts) safety has become a much more critical and important position in the NFL and the old rule of thumb is simply going to be replaced as drafts like the last several which have seen safeties taken quite early begin to stack up. Stats and past occurrence are a great INDICATOR but they do not justify drawing a conclusion as to what the draft will actually look like. Folks who claimed that safeties simply do not get chosen early in the 1st round simply ignored the facts which led to 3 players (Huff, Whitner and Allen) all being chosen by pick 15. Some chose the increasingly distant past over the present and the future by trying to claim past early S picks like Roy Williams was simply an exception caused by one player's efforts and ignored the facts of the present that even later picks like S Polamalu in Pitt were getting recognized and were putting butts in the seats and helping their team win the SB, These stat addicts of past draft performance also seemed to simply ignore the fact that pick #9 Detroit just after us was said by many to have an opening and need for a safety in their Cover 2 and that after OAK surprised most everyone by picking Huff at #7, the Bills had no choice but to take Whitner with the #8 or they might likely lose him to the very next pick making a trade down a bad idea. The fact that Detroit did indeed take a safety with their second pick shows that we would have been taking a large risk by trading down for more picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 and did it really matter in the end? the team that took huff is picking # 1 we are picking 12 And right now, given what I've seen at the NFL level, I'd take Whitner over Huff. As far as I know NOBODY criticized the Huff pick (except for me, of course). BTW, it took me about 12 times before I spelled "criticized" correctly...and a few for "took", too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 I'm sure that nobody around here forgot the national heat that Marv took when he drafted Whitner at the #8 spot. It looks like the Falcons are going to take S LaRon Landry with their first pick. If they do, what do you think the draft gurus will think about Atlanta's selection of a Safety with the #8 pick? Good point. I'm sure there will be some excuses made for why it is now OK for Atlanta to take a safety at #8 and it wasn't for us. Oh, I see one already: "Landry is projected to go in the top 10". But, I'm sure it was ok to take Huff at #7, but not ok for us to draft Whitner at #8. Lame at best. Of course, it was OK for Oakland to draft a player they wanted to start at SS, we were "crazy" or must be "senile" to do the same. Right. Maybe we should ask: How many awards did Huff get last year? = 0. As I recall Donte Whitner got Rookie of the Month. Oh and I already know the other excuse for Huff: "He was on a bad team". Not true at all in terms of defense - Oakland ended up ranked 3rd. And, as far as Whitner vs. Huff in terms of stats? Year Team G Total Tkl Ast Sacks Int Yds Avg Lg TD Pass Def Huff 2006 Oakland Raiders 16 78 64.0 14 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 1 Whitner 2006 Buffalo Bills 15 104 67.0 37 0 1 10 10.0 10 0 4 But I'm sure LaRon Landry will put up 120 tackles this year and at least 5 picks , which is why it will be ok to take him at #8. The Bills are still nuts for taking Whitner at 8. Edit: And, if you have a guy rated high, which Marv obviously did - and based on results was 100% correct, you don't !@#$ about and trade down hoping he will be there later. You take him now. Why? Because there is a reason the press "experts" aren't GMs, and the real experts - the guys who have the job, are. Chances are that Marv wasn't the only guy who had Whitner rated high - therefore no reason to !@#$ around. I hope we do the same thing this year with our top rated guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROCCEO Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 I think the folks whose views adhere to the statistical rule of thumb are choosing that over instead adhering to reality in the NFL. Particularly with the increasing adoption of the Cover 2 and Tampa 2 scheme (run by such teams as the Bills and SB champion Colts) safety has become a much more critical and important position in the NFL and the old rule of thumb is simply going to be replaced as drafts like the last several which have seen safeties taken quite early begin to stack up. Stats and past occurrence are a great INDICATOR but they do not justify drawing a conclusion as to what the draft will actually look like. Folks who claimed that safeties simply do not get chosen early in the 1st round simply ignored the facts which led to 3 players (Huff, Whitner and Allen) all being chosen by pick 15. Some chose the increasingly distant past over the present and the future by trying to claim past early S picks like Roy Williams was simply an exception caused by one player's efforts and ignored the facts of the present that even later picks like S Polamalu in Pitt were getting recognized and were putting butts in the seats and helping their team win the SB, These stat addicts of past draft performance also seemed to simply ignore the fact that pick #9 Detroit just after us was said by many to have an opening and need for a safety in their Cover 2 and that after OAK surprised most everyone by picking Huff at #7, the Bills had no choice but to take Whitner with the #8 or they might likely lose him to the very next pick making a trade down a bad idea. The fact that Detroit did indeed take a safety with their second pick shows that we would have been taking a large risk by trading down for more picks. Bravo. Couldnt have said it much better myself. Do you think that they were all that happy in detroit to take a concussion prone LB with a top-10 pick(wait, i forgot matt millen was their GM for a second). The point is that the draft is unpredictable. Also, if you have a guy rated that high, as stated above, then you would likely thinkt hat other skilled talent evaluators feel the same. No sense rolling the dice and missing the bus, get on while the door is open(if that makes sense). The draft cannot come soon enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billsjunkie Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 I don't think they will get ripped for it. Landry is a top 5 prospect by some. The guy is a monster. I love Whitner and I never hated taking him at #8 but Landry is a much better pro prospect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 The fact that Detroit did indeed take a safety with their second pick shows that we would have been taking a large risk by trading down for more picks. A large risk of what? Of a team with suckass lines on both sides of the ball not being able to select a small safety in a stocked draft? PG, you know how much I respect both you and your posts, or so I hope after all these years, but you DO need to take your head out of Levy's a$$ for just 5 minutes, and at least explore the possibility that Whitner was not the only way to go in the 06 draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billsjunkie Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 Well looking at the other picks right now.....Whitner is one of the few that was slated to go around us that played very well his rookie year. Him and Simpson were rock solid back there for most of the year. They played that Cover 2 very well towards the end of the year. Just like Bob Sanders and Bethea.......they didn't give up the big plays and thats what this defense is all about. If teams want to grab four yards on the run here and there than we will let them. But big plays against us will be few and far between. Whitner proved to me that he was worth that pick. Ngata would not fit this scheme, bunkley is a loser so far, Leinhart wasn't even an option and neither was Cutler. Everyone keeps saying that they should have traded back but come on. There are no guarentees. Again the Bills got the player that they wanted. If we could have done something better as far as moving around I'm sure we would be employeed by the league now. Why people are still hung up with Whitner at #8 is mindboggling to me. Its the year 2007 people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybob Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 Ngata wouldn't fit in with DTs who get pushed around like shopping carts- yeah I guess you have a point there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Wing Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 Here's what will be said...."At with the #8 pick, the Falcons select LaRon Landry...he will be the defense QB to compliment the offensive QB, Mike Vick. Now, let's spend the next 15 minutes talking about our love affair with Mike Vick..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 Marv took heat because Whitner was projected as a mid to late 1st. Landry is projected as a top 10 by many, so I wouldnt expect them to take any heat. Also, I think Michael Huff went just a pick ahead to the Raiders....I guess the draft experts just couldn't digest the fact of two safeties going back to back in the top 10 and took their venting on the bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordio Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 Also, I think Michael Huff went just a pick ahead to the Raiders....I guess the draft experts just couldn't digest the fact of two safeties going back to back in the top 10 and took their ventingon the bills. It would of been really interesting last year if the raiders did what they should of done & picked Leinart. The bills all along have said they had Whinter rated higher then Huff, but from what I remember every draft source had Huff as the highest rated safety. Guess we will never know if the bills really did like Whitner over Huff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 Well looking at the other picks right now.....Whitner is one of the few that was slated to go around us that played very well his rookie year. Him and Simpson were rock solid back there for most of the year. They played that Cover 2 very well towards the end of the year. Just like Bob Sanders and Bethea.......they didn't give up the big plays and thats what this defense is all about. If teams want to grab four yards on the run here and there than we will let them. But big plays against us will be few and far between. Whitner proved to me that he was worth that pick. Ngata would not fit this scheme, bunkley is a loser so far, Leinhart wasn't even an option and neither was Cutler. Everyone keeps saying that they should have traded back but come on. There are no guarentees. Again the Bills got the player that they wanted. If we could have done something better as far as moving around I'm sure we would be employeed by the league now. Why people are still hung up with Whitner at #8 is mindboggling to me. Its the year 2007 people. It's easy for safeties to play well in the Cover-2 when they're consistently 15-20 yards off the ball, regardless of down. Yes, Whitner made 104 tackles, but has anyone looked at enough tape to determine where those stops were made? I'm just asking. Fewell and DJ decided to minimize the effect of having rookies playing safety by playing them back. While I don't have a link to something to back this, I'm willing to bet the defensive coaches had to implement something to reduce risk in their secondary. It's unfair to describe a player as good by the amount of tackles he's made. If it's also unfair to say a player is good if their rookie season was good. Whitner may be a great player. He may be a Bob Sanders type of game changer. But I'm not going to jump the gun and call him a premier talent just yet. We'll see. Until then, Buffalo selected a player that did not fit in with Marv's belief in building the lines first. Ngata was there and we were told he didn't fit into our plans on defense. That's fine, but last year's version of a defense didn't exactly fit in with stopping the run either. That's why you had a MLB with 150+ tackles, and a rookie SS with 100+. The front four simply could not make more stops within the first 3-4 yards of the LOS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 A large risk of what? Of a team with suckass lines on both sides of the ball not being able to select a small safety in a stocked draft? PG, you know how much I respect both you and your posts, or so I hope after all these years, but you DO need to take your head out of Levy's a$$ for just 5 minutes, and at least explore the possibility that Whitner was not the only way to go in the 06 draft. If we had not taken Whitner when we did and DET had taken him at #9 the risk we would have taken was that either we trade down to lets say #12 and instead take the 3rd SS taken (Jason Allen was taken at #16 by the Fins and he played in a back-up role all season) as our starting safety, or alternately we end up going with the best SS on our current roster which was none other than gulp Coy Wire. My guess is that you would likely take a completely different approach than the Bills have taken to team building due to your commitment to drafting and resigning OL players (it all started with their decision to trade for RJ instead of drafting Tre Thomas) or perhaps last year you would have traded up from 8 somehow to select D'Brick and them pulled off some other Rickey Williams esque draft maneuver to get Mangold as well. However, the risk of not getting Whitner when we did after the reality that we created a hole at SS with the cut of Milloy was that if we lost him we were looking at likely having Jason Allen or Coy Wire as our starting SS. We would have lost that bet badly and wished we had finished 7-9 as we did IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts