I've never seen him play and am relying on reporters, but ...

[Ozymandius]

Didn't the Giants draft a CB in the first round last year? And didn't he start in the Super Bowl?

 

The Giants also had dominant lines...

 

Again, it just depends on how you feel about the Bills lines as currently constituted. If you think the lines are outstanding, then yeah, draft whatever.

[dave mcbride]

I don't think anybody said it would be wise to only draft linemen. I even praised the Corner pick in Rnd 4 and many of the other picks, especially Ellis obviously. I just don't believe in first round corners for this franchise with limited resources and a zone scheme, especially a corner that doesn't get INTs.

To be fair, in the last 9 games of 2006, the Bills let Clements play man, and the defense dramatically improved. They're willing to adjust to the talent. Last year, they had terrible talent at the corner position, so zone was pretty much the only option. Don't get me wrong -- I like Greer and McGee. They try hard, and they have OK technique. But they're inarguably sub-average NFL CBs, getting beat like drums repeatedly throughout the season. The Bills definitely needed an upgrade. If they had drafted D-line, I would have been OK in theory, but who was there to draft? Harvey was gone, and the rest, by the looks of them, were late first rounders at best. McKelvin seems to be a sure thing -- good size, blazing speed, good cover skills, and real production against top-tier southeast talent. What's not to like?

[Sisyphean Bills]

To be fair, in the last 9 games of 2006, the Bills let Clements play man, and the defense dramatically improved. They're willing to adjust to the talent. Last year, they had terrible talent at the corner position, so zone was pretty much the only option. Don't get me wrong -- I like Greer and McGee. They try hard, and they have OK technique. But they're inarguably sub-average NFL CBs, getting beat like drums repeatedly throughout the season. The Bills definitely needed an upgrade. If they had drafted D-line, I would have been OK in theory, but who was there to draft? Harvey was gone, and the rest, by the looks of them, were late first rounders at best. McKelvin seems to be a sure thing -- good size, blazing speed, good cover skills, and real production against top-tier southeast talent. What's not to like?

Indeed. Cursed with a kid that looks every bit of a shutdown corner. Damn. And I thought the Bills would've tried to fix their pathetic pass defense.

[ans4e64]

They drafted more secondary in the first round this year too.

 

And 2nd Round. Terrell Thomas CB.

[Ozymandius]

To be fair, in the last 9 games of 2006, the Bills let Clements play man, and the defense dramatically improved. They're willing to adjust to the talent. Last year, they had terrible talent at the corner position, so zone was pretty much the only option. Don't get me wrong -- I like Greer and McGee. They try hard, and they have OK technique. But they're inarguably sub-average NFL CBs, getting beat like drums repeatedly throughout the season. The Bills definitely needed an upgrade. If they had drafted D-line, I would have been OK in theory, but who was there to draft? Harvey was gone, and the rest, by the looks of them, were late first rounders at best. McKelvin seems to be a sure thing -- good size, blazing speed, good cover skills, and real production against top-tier southeast talent. What's not to like?

 

Well, his hands, for one thing. But yes, he appears to be a good CB prospect if the selection had to be a corner. BTW, zone teams don't zone necessarily because they have bad corners; they zone because they have zone corners, guys who are good in zone and keep the play in front of them, read the QB's eyes, make plays on the ball and deliver hard hits. McKelvin will probably be fine in a zone scheme and I think they'll stick with zone. The 2006 compromise was because it was the first year in the system, I think. If the coaches were that flexible, McGee and Greer would probably have been playing man last season since they seem more suited for that.

[Lori]

Okay, now I'm fully in spinning-off-on-a-tangent mode...

 

Giants defense in the Super Bowl (starters in bold):

DE - Strahan (#2), Umenyiora (#2), Tuck (#3)

DT - Cofield (#4), Robbins (#2 MIN), Alford (#3)

LB - Pierce (UDFA Redskins), Mitchell (#2 KC), Torbor (#4), Blackburn (UDFA), Wilkinson (#3)

CB - Ross (#1), Webster (#2), Madison (#2 MIA), Dockery (UDFA), McQuarters (#1 SF)

S - Wilson (#5), Butler (UDFA), Johnson (#7)

 

(NOTE: DE/OLB Matthias Kiwanuka, #1-2006, was on IR.)

 

High picks at CB and DE, mid-rounders and free-agent signings at DT and LB (other than Kiwi), and basically ignoring S. So... when talking about teams that build through drafting linemen high (Pats* first and foremost), should the Giants really be part of the discussion? Is their draft strategy that much different than Buffalo's, or did they merely draft better players at the same position?

 

To compare:

DT - McCargo (#1-2005), Stroud (#1-2001 JAX), KWilliams (#5-2006), SJohnson (UDFA MIN)

DE - Schobel (#2-2001), Denney (#2-2002), Kelsay (#2-2003), Ellis (#3-2008)

LB - Crowell (#3-2003), Posluszny (#2-2007), Mitchell (#2 KC), Ellison (#6-2006), DiGiorgio (UDFA)

CB - McKelvin (#1-2008), McGee (#4-2003), Greer (UDFA), James (#3-2001 NYG), Corner (#4-2008), Cox (#7-2008)

[Billsguy]

Didn't the Giants draft a CB in the first round last year? And didn't he start in the Super Bowl?

 

ADD: Aaron Ross (#1-2007), Corey Webster (#2-2005), Sam Madison (#2-1997 MIA), Kevin Dockery (UDFA-2006), and R.W. McQuarters (#1-1998 SF) are currently listed as their top five corners.

 

 

The Giants built their lines before they built the secondary. The lines won the Super Bowl for them.

[colin]

The Giants built their lines before they built the secondary. The lines won the Super Bowl for them.

this is honestly a bad take.

 

the giants had a not great pass rush in 06. osi and strahan combined for the exact same number of sacks as

kelsay and aaron did for the bills this season. in 06 we were top 8 or so in sacks.

 

now we lost and now replaced secondary, an have actually upgraded our d line, adding a rook DE

got mccargo healthy, stroud and johnson. we also have more linebackers who can play.

 

you can say the giants line won it, or you can say getting more aggressive with blitzes and the like

helped and was possible because of the secondary getting healthy and more talented.

 

either way, they were crap before upgrading their secondary and so were we.

 

now we have horses, and i think some studs, at every level of D.

[ExWNYer]

The Giants also had dominant lines... Again, it just depends on how you feel about the Bills lines as currently constituted. If you think the lines are outstanding, then yeah, draft whatever.

The Giants built their lines before they built the secondary. The lines won the Super Bowl for them.

The Bills spent $75 million last season upgrading the O-line. They re-signed Whittle this year for depth and took a project with huge upside late in the draft in the form of Bell. They traded for Marcus Stroud, signed Spencer Johnson, drafted Chris Ellis, and get the benefit of an added year of experience and health for McCargo (not to mention Poz) for the D-line. I'm a proponent of building a team from the lines out, too, but is it OK to fill holes elsewhere?? Jesus H., people!

[AKC]

AKC and Bill from NYC are two of the best posters here, but in my opinion, their bias towards the lines (offensive and defensive) blinds them the simple fact that dominant teams feature good DBs. I could bring up a ton of examples, but really, the simplest one is SF minus Deion Sanders in 1992-93 v. SF with Deion Sanders in 1994. Or Dallas minus Deion Sanders in 1994 v. Dallas with Deion Sanders in 1995. Or--finally--the Raiders' Super Bowl team of 2001 with Charles Woodson (he of the game-ending sack of Tom Brady in the snowglobe game) v. the Raiders a few years before without him.

 

I'd added a study to the board that showed CB as a real priority of the best teams in the league. I've also posted on a number of occcasions that I feel our 22007 CB chart was among the worst in the NFL. After Ellis was drafted the reality for us this year was to follow the trends of the best teams and bring in the best CB-

 

It was not the pick that immediately makes us a force to contend with, but it was the best situation for us on this draft day and this draft class. As the draft went on, the other picks will become more clear- but the first pick this year in taking a cover guy based upon the board we were looking at has a good chance to turn out to be hard to argue in the future.

 

The most important thing that happened was that the team didn't make an error that would have cost us for many years by using that first round pick on a second round talent WR, and in doing so leave a #11 talent CB out there for someone behind us to grab.

[Lori]

The Giants built their lines before they built the secondary.

Buffalo drafted Schobel (#2-01), Ron Edwards (#3-01), Denney (#2-02), and Kelsay (#2-03) before NY picked Umenyiora (#2-03), Tuck (#3-05), Cofield (#4-06), or Alford (#3-07). In fact, OU was still on the board when Donahoe traded up for Kelsay. (Yeah. Let that one burn for a while.)

 

Toss in a Bannan here and a Tim Anderson there, and Donahoe didn't exactly ignore the DL. Again, was the Giants' draft strategy all that different, or were they just better at evaluating talent?

 

While I'm here, the starting O-line from XLII:

LT - Diehl (#5-2003)

LG - Seubert (UDFA)

C - O'Hara (UDFA CLE)

RG - Snee (#2-2004)

RT - McKenzie (#3-2001 NYJ)

 

Edit: Waitaminute, AKC. Are you saying you're all right with this draft? Not sure I expected that answer.

[AKC]

Buffalo drafted Schobel (#2-01), Ron Edwards (#3-01), Denney (#2-02), and Kelsay (#2-03) before NY picked Umenyiora (#2-03), Tuck (#3-05), Cofield (#4-06), or Alford (#3-07). In fact, OU was still on the board when Donahoe traded up for Kelsay. (Yeah. Let that one burn for a while.)

 

Toss in a Bannan here and a Tim Anderson there, and Donahoe didn't exactly ignore the DL. Again, was the Giants' draft strategy all that different, or were they just better at evaluating talent?

 

While I'm here, the starting O-line from XLII:

LT - Diehl (#5-2003)

LG - Seubert (UDFA)

C - O'Hara (UDFA CLE)

RG - Snee (#2-2004)

RT - McKenzie (#3-2001 NYJ)

 

Edit: Waitaminute, AKC. Are you saying you're all right with this draft? Not sure I expected that answer.

 

The only type of player in the draft who might have immediately raised our status to contender was gone 4 spots before we picked. After studying the way the best teams have contemporarily been drafting, and without a sure hit 2 role TE there to go to, the best play for us is probably going to historically be the one we went with. Our management didn't fail us by taking a 2nd round WR at 11, and even thyough I think the defense we're playing right now doesn't have to have as good a CB as we appear to have drafted, the reality is you have to work with the players on the board and we did. I mentioned to a few of the TSW alumni as the draft started that seeing us take a CB would probably be the best move we could make, and I haven't changed my feelings on that.

 

We're razor thin at what I believe is the most important position in football today- but there are few high caliber prospects at the critical spot and in this draft onely one- and he wasn't going to get to us. We know that UDFA are nearly as likely to end up in our starting lineup as 5+ rounders, so the positional side later on in the draft seems less important. Like I said earlier- we got a little better in FA and we got a little better in the draft. With the weaker schedule, and assuming Stroud is healthy enough to start at least 11 or 12 games, we should expect an improvement in the win column in 2008. The downside is that if Stroud has trouble and ends up with a limited contribution, we'll be an embarrassing last in the AFC East and the team everyone in the league will want to play- and run on.

[Chilly]

Okay, but my guess is historically, there are more playoff teams that have average DBs/secondary but good lines than there are playoff teams with average lines and good DBs/secondary. Your Super Bowl champion Giants are now a classic example of the former.

 

It's all moot anyway. The team that will be enjoying McKelvin's prime years in the league won't be the Bills. If everything goes right, he'll take two years to develop, three years to round into a gamechanger, including one Pro Bowl appearance, and just as he's ready to peak in his prime and become a perennial Pro-Bowler, he'll bolt via free agency. That's if everything goes right and he doesn't bust.

 

I would challenge the notion that the Giants secondary was all that pedestrian. Wilson, Ross, and and Madison are well above average players.

 

Of course, I think Dave's point that the most important thing is a well balanced team is the best answer, and the truth.

 

Yes, the Giants pass rush did an amazing job. Singling them out on the defense and claiming that the Giants secondary was overrated as a result is just plain silly.

 

Pass rush will make a secondary look a bit better than it is; no pass rush in the world can make a bad secondary look great.

 

Buffalo drafted Schobel (#2-01), Ron Edwards (#3-01), Denney (#2-02), and Kelsay (#2-03) before NY picked Umenyiora (#2-03), Tuck (#3-05), Cofield (#4-06), or Alford (#3-07). In fact, OU was still on the board when Donahoe traded up for Kelsay. (Yeah. Let that one burn for a while.)

 

Which makes me wonder, was it the talent difference or the great difference in coaching?

 

Toss in a Bannan here and a Tim Anderson there, and Donahoe didn't exactly ignore the DL. Again, was the Giants' draft strategy all that different, or were they just better at evaluating talent?

 

While I'm here, the starting O-line from XLII:

LT - Diehl (#5-2003)

LG - Seubert (UDFA)

C - O'Hara (UDFA CLE)

RG - Snee (#2-2004)

RT - McKenzie (#3-2001 NYJ)

 

Yup.

[Pete]

I would challenge the notion that the Giants secondary was all that pedestrian. Wilson, Ross, and and Madison are well above average players.

 

Of course, I think Dave's point that the most important thing is a well balanced team is the best answer, and the truth.

 

Yes, the Giants pass rush did an amazing job. Singling them out on the defense and claiming that the Giants secondary was overrated as a result is just plain silly.

 

Pass rush will make a secondary look a bit better than it is; no pass rush in the world can make a bad secondary look great.

 

 

 

Which makes me wonder, was it the talent difference or the great difference in coaching?

 

 

 

Yup.

That Giants secondary was great last year! If anyone watched the Superbowl they would of noticed the Giants secondary beating the sh-- out of Pats receivers. I have never seen a secondary hit so hard

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

Who knows what will happen four, five, or six years from now? Historically, the Bills have enjoyed the better part of their first-round DBs' careers--Odomes turned into a cripple in Seattle, Thomas "hands of stone" Smith (a very underrated player, to be honest) was a bust in Chicago, Jeff Burris was nothing after departing the Bills, and Hank Jones was simply done after eight excellent years. It's too early to tell whether Clements is worth it, although Winfield still looks good (despite playing on team that's loaded on defense yet is consistently weak in the stats category).

There's this pretty strong perception on the board that the Bills will never resign their top CBs, they just wave bye to them after they develop and become playmakers. The textbook examples are Winfield and Clements. Maybe the media never figured it out, but I can't remember a single article ever written about the Bills historically not resigning key positions. That in and of itself isn't a big deal, just an indicator that it might not be a real important trend to worry about.

 

JMO, but Donahoe showed a lot of talent to the door. Winfield was one of them. Ralph, Littmann, Marv and others have instilled a thrifty franchise that doesn't overspend, but opens the wallet when they perceive value. Not perfect by any means, but overall not bad at all. Dockery and Schoebel are good examples. Darwin Walker anyone?

 

Clements at $80M? No, not in their opinion. McGee at $23M? Yes, that's worth it to them. Is McGee a pro bowler? Maybe not, but can anyone besides ExpertOpinion claim that Clements is 3 X better than McGee?

 

Hate them if you will, the Cheatriots rarely pay the big bucks like they did with Moss. They plug-in relatively cheap, interchangeable parts and let the Asante Samuels-types walk. The difference is they have Scott Pioli and Belicheat. He's a really good judge of talent despite his lack of social skills, ethics, and flair for fashion.

 

What the Bills do with Lee Evans should be telling. Does he get Kelsay'd, hometown-discounted, or does he walk?

 

As opposed to looking back at over multiple administrations to whether specific positions were being resigned, we should look at the team's overall success (lately and over the next few years) in keeping their star players or at least bringing in pretty damn good replacements on a regular basis.

 

It's too early to tell...

[Mickey]

I'd added a study to the board that showed CB as a real priority of the best teams in the league. I've also posted on a number of occcasions that I feel our 22007 CB chart was among the worst in the NFL. After Ellis was drafted the reality for us this year was to follow the trends of the best teams and bring in the best CB-

 

It was not the pick that immediately makes us a force to contend with, but it was the best situation for us on this draft day and this draft class. As the draft went on, the other picks will become more clear- but the first pick this year in taking a cover guy based upon the board we were looking at has a good chance to turn out to be hard to argue in the future.

 

The most important thing that happened was that the team didn't make an error that would have cost us for many years by using that first round pick on a second round talent WR, and in doing so leave a #11 talent CB out there for someone behind us to grab.

I have been beating the same drum on the CB issue. A quick look at our defensive roster over the last few years and some game film from last year is all that is needed to see how badly we needed a corner. The fact that no WR was taken in the first and that we got Hardy in the second certainly demonstrates that the Bills made the right call in waiting on a WR.

 

My only concern is not that we took a corner but whether we took the right one. Only time will tell if we should have taken DRC or Jenkins. It sure looks like this is the right guy but I didn't see enough of their play to be able to see a clear difference between the three of them.

[obie_wan]

Yes, but teams with good lines and no skill players don't go anywhere. If all Buffalo did was draft O-LIne and D-Line, we'd have great blockers and run stuffers, but we'd have no one to stop the pass and no running backs or receivers to make plays on offense, unless we paid through the teeth in FA to get them. And RBs, QBs, WRs, CBs are all far more expensive FA pick ups than a solid DT, DE, LB. Buffalo proved that this year. Our lines are FINE for now. Could we use more depth? Probably, but the Bills did draft a very good DE prospect in RD3 and we have a solid stable of OLs right now. Get players you actually need. Buffalo did that and we will reap the benefits over the course of the season.

 

The Giants beat the Bills in SB 25 with a journeyman at QB, a retread at RB, bad WRS and CBs because they dominated at the line of scrimmage

[colin]

The Giants beat the Bills in SB 25 with a journeyman at QB, a retread at RB, bad WRS and CBs because they dominated at the line of scrimmage

 

but the giants play makers made a huge diff in the last super bowl, including secondary and their big WR.

 

and the colts won with strong secondary play and skill players.

 

and a couple of key turnovers, including a massive end zone interception won it for the steelers.

 

and ty law and rodney harrison made the biggest single contributions to 2 of the pats wins.

 

you are just being way too myopic. you bill and akc started out (a couple years ago) with a very strong point, but

we've put a ton of guys onto our lines (resigned our DEs, drafted ellis, mccargo, williams, signed stroud, johnson, dock,

extended peters, signed walker, signed fowler, drafted butler).

 

we also have some LBs, and now completed the trifecta with corners who can cover the 4 and 5 wide sets that have been destroying us.

[Gordio]

Mckelvin was a great value pick & as the receivers kept dropping & we got Hardy in the 2nd round, it is pretty obvious the bills made a solid choice at #11. The only other guy I would not mind seeing them take is Albert, but Im happy with Mckelvin. I never gave him much thought because I assumed he would be gone by the time the bills picked.

[dave mcbride]

The Giants beat the Bills in SB 25 with a journeyman at QB, a retread at RB, bad WRS and CBs because they dominated at the line of scrimmage

Marc Collins was a bad CB? That's the first time I've heard that.