The_Real Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 I think up until this point I've been enamoured with the idea of a guy like Sweed or Kelly because of their size. Both being 6'4" and 225+ makes them ideal in the redzone. James Hardy with his 6'7" 220 frame could translate into a fantastic weapon in the NFL. Is a guy like Thomas, at 6'2", big enough to be that true redzone 'go to' guy? I love what Lee Evans does for this team and to a lesser extent I can live with Roscoe and Josh Reed, but it's become evident they need a bigger physical presence. Is a guy like Thomas the ideal size? Forget the fact that he's only really produced one season and consider how his game translates to the NFL in terms of what the Bills need from the position. My answer is no. I like him as a player but not enough to pass over the defensive players who'll be available at 11 that make you better immediately. There is too much talent available in the 2nd round at WR to take a guy like Thomas in the first. What's your perspective? T_R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 How many 6'2 215# CBs are in the NFL that can run 4.4 40s? That is a crazy matchup problem! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smuvtalker Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 I think up until this point I've been enamoured with the idea of a guy like Sweed or Kelly because of their size. Both being 6'4" and 225+ makes them ideal in the redzone. James Hardy with his 6'7" 220 frame could translate into a fantastic weapon in the NFL. Is a guy like Thomas, at 6'2", big enough to be that true redzone 'go to' guy? I love what Lee Evans does for this team and to a lesser extent I can live with Roscoe and Josh Reed, but it's become evident they need a bigger physical presence. Is a guy like Thomas the ideal size? Forget the fact that he's only really produced one season and consider how his game translates to the NFL in terms of what the Bills need from the position. My answer is no. I like him as a player but not enough to pass over the defensive players who'll be available at 11 that make you better immediately. There is too much talent available in the 2nd round at WR to take a guy like Thomas in the first. What's your perspective? T_R I think you post a very valid point, I myself have thought about his size, especially with all of us being so desperate for size at the WR position, and seeing the likes of 6'4 and 6'7 type guys available, seeing Devin Thomas at 6'2 makes you give him a 2nd thought... But the sad thing is this...He'd still be the tallest receiver on our roster...and there's no denying he's an electrifying talent with tremendous potential. That said, I don't know if I'd take him over Sweed or Hardy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In space no one can hear Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 As long as he is 6'2" and doesn't have "tiny hands", he is plenty big enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt. Dan's Revenge Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 In a word, No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stenbar Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 I would rather see a big Tight End solve our redzone problems..Not sure there are any worth a number 11 pick but I like Fred Davis alot..He seems to have a knack for getting open and is a decent blocker..I would like to see atrade for an established wr and draft defense end Harvey in the first...Then getting Davis with our 2nds if he is there..It might be a stretch to get Davis in the 2nd but crazier things have happened.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Trooth Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 How many 6'2 215# CBs are in the NFL that can run 4.4 40s? That is a crazy matchup problem! So why do all the experts say he ain't woth #11? Didn't David Boston create matchup problems? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 So why do all the experts say he ain't woth #11? Didn't David Boston create matchup problems? Because he had 1 good season. I never saw Devin Thomas all that much. What I have seen, he seems to have some really nice potential. He's very good after the catch, strong with good leaping ability. As someone else said. Better to get a te for a redzone threat. Having another outside wr, to work the underneath-intermediate areas, as well as be another potential big play threat. Who excells at yac is the ideal kind of receiver for any offense. As far as David Boston goes, he could've been great if not for becoming a ballooned up steroid freak. He lost his speed fast, and his injuries, only complicated matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UpstateSwagger Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 I would rather see a big Tight End solve our redzone problems..Not sure there are any worth a number 11 pick but I like Fred Davis alot..He seems to have a knack for getting open and is a decent blocker..I would like to see atrade for an established wr and draft defense end Harvey in the first...Then getting Davis with our 2nds if he is there..It might be a stretch to get Davis in the 2nd but crazier things have happened.. That's the ticket right there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ax4782 Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 In a word, No. Ditto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 So why do all the experts say he ain't woth #11? Didn't David Boston create matchup problems? David Boston was incredibly talented. He led the NFL in plays over 40 yards one year when he was healthy. Boston was almost as fast as Thomas and most definitely presented matchup problems because his huge size. Well he got busted for roids and has not been the same player since Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 Does anyone else think we need to draft two WR's? Like a Thomas/Nelson combo or something. Because if we just draft one tall WR and he get's hurt.. we'll we're back to the same place we were last year. Evans, Thomas, Reed, Parish, Nelson would be a descent WR corps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperKillerRobots Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 Does anyone else think we need to draft two WR's? Like a Thomas/Nelson combo or something. Because if we just draft one tall WR and he get's hurt.. we'll we're back to the same place we were last year. Evans, Thomas, Reed, Parish, Nelson would be a descent WR corps. No. We need an WR who can play and is over 6 feet and a TE to be the red zone target. Two WRs is one too many, especially in the first 150 picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 Does anyone else think we need to draft two WR's? Like a Thomas/Nelson combo or something. Because if we just draft one tall WR and he get's hurt.. we'll we're back to the same place we were last year. Evans, Thomas, Reed, Parish, Nelson would be a descent WR corps. no I don't think so. I think if we use two of our top 4 picks on a WR and TE we will be ok. The TE will provide the redzone threat and the WR will be a game breaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBilliever Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 I honestly think the addition of a Martellus Bennett (6'7" recieving TE) with a mid range WR (6'1 - 6'3) who can jump is what this offense needs. Robert Royal is a good tight end, a good BLOCKING TE. He can push the OLB, and since he can also marginally catch, drag the safety to his side. He's not consistent with it, though. He's the jack of all, with a plus in blocking. Bring Martellus or another recieving TE to the mix and you'll have some serious match up problems. If we don't go big, go Bennett. (Paid for by the Billiever for Bennett foundation) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 I honestly think the addition of a Martellus Bennett (6'7" recieving TE) with a mid range WR (6'1 - 6'3) who can jump is what this offense needs. Robert Royal is a good tight end, a good BLOCKING TE. He can push the OLB, and since he can also marginally catch, drag the safety to his side. He's not consistent with it, though. He's the jack of all, with a plus in blocking. Bring Martellus or another recieving TE to the mix and you'll have some serious match up problems. If we don't go big, go Bennett. (Paid for by the Billiever for Bennett foundation) A late round WR that can jump is Mark Bradford, from Stanford. He's 6'1", 211, but jumped a freaky 41" at the combine. I'd like the Bills to draft 2 WR's--one in Round 1-3 and Bradford. I actually like the UDFA's still on the roster, as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 How tall was young Eric Moulds......in his prime he seemed plenty big enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockinon Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 I would rather see a big Tight End solve our redzone problems..Not sure there are any worth a number 11 pick but I like Fred Davis alot..He seems to have a knack for getting open and is a decent blocker..I would like to see atrade for an established wr and draft defense end Harvey in the first...Then getting Davis with our 2nds if he is there..It might be a stretch to get Davis in the 2nd but crazier things have happened.. This isn't really a stretch. We could concievably trade up or down for that matter to take a tight end early in the second round. Maybe late in the first round. It just depends on how the cards are dealt. I wouldn't mind a big fast tight end for a target at all because I think a tight end has the potential to create larger matchup problems for a defense. They can't be certain if he is going to stay in and block or break free for a catch. With a spread out reciever set the defense pretty much knows what is coming. TE gives us the big reciever we are looking for and someone who can block on running plays. I don't know about you guys but I also like watching cover guys trying to take down a big TE. TEs don't try to out manuever defenders when they are going to get tackled. They make sure that it is them who is laying a lick on the defender before they lay a lick on him. Gives them something to think about. People say a big reciever is the answer but if you want a really physical offense the tight end is the way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted April 18, 2008 Share Posted April 18, 2008 I would not say that he is TOO small...just not big enough for me IMO. I would rather have someone like Kelly or Sweed at 6-4, or Hardy at 6-6. Quick- how many great NFL receivers over 6'3" can you name? In history? And by what logic to you propose that 6' 3" is a better WR? What do you think Jerry Rice and Steve Smith have to say about this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted April 18, 2008 Share Posted April 18, 2008 What do you think Jerry Rice and Steve Smith have to say about this? Probably, "Fo' shizzle in the hizzle!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts