kernowboy
02-28-2008, 07:15 AM
With everyone having their favourite pick at No11, I thought it might be important to look at all the positions on the team and prioritize them in terms of team needs when determining my selection. I've divided this into urgent needs and nice but not as urgent.
Needs
DT: Our inability to stop the run makes this a crucial need. There is not a lot in Free Agency, though some players are on the trading block. The fact that so little is being asked for the likes of Rogers and Williams (apparently) does raise a flag for me, as to whether it could be a boom or bust deal. Trading does not always bring success.
Of the draft options, Dorsey seems to have a huge injury flag and will be compelled to play through pain for the rest of his career which maybe 2 or 8 years. Ellis did himself no favours at the combine with his speed , but remains the healthiest option though unlikely to fall so far.
of Balmer, Sims, Bryant, Moore and Laws, none advanced their cause so far, though I would be disappointed that if Sims, Moore and Laws are available at No41, we do not immediately grab them. No DT at 11
WR: Our biggest need on offence but none of the WR stepped up. There must be questions as to how quick Kelly is, Sweed did better than expect though has an injury flag, Hardy has a character flag, and Thomas has only produced in one year. What is remarkable about this draft is the depth at this position means we could select a WR deep into Day 2 - Rounds 4 or 5 - and still end up with Marques Colston Lite. No-one has stepped up to justify such a high selection. No WR at 11
DE: We've a lot of money tied up here but little production from the left. An improved interior may assist this, but also Denney may not full return to the average play he has provided so far. Considering the DEs available, Merling looks a player as does Harvey and Groves but No11 is too early for any of them. A DT is more important. No DE at 11
CB: A tandem of Greer & McGee with fingers crossed about Youboty. Mmmmm. Cornerback was a position that did step up. McKelvin was quick as was Jenkins and Cason, Talib, and Reggie Smith all now have a R1 grade. But Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie peformed like his cousin, Antonio, and a 6ft1, 184lbs corner who runs 4.28 in the 40 may be a selection to good to miss even if a lockdown corner isn't 100% necessary in the Cover2 defence. Worth considering at 11
TE: There are several guys who would be an asset to the Bills, maybe straight into the line up on Day1, but considering the two best at the combine, Davis and Keller are undersized, we shouldn't look at this until Day2. None have a Round1 grade and at No11 would be an insane selection. No TE at 11
Nice but not neccessary
QB: Brohm still available would be pause for thought especially as next years QB class looks light. We might be able to leverage a team's desire for Brohm to trade down, but ultimately I see Edwards being given a full starting season, and the Bills having their fingers crossed that a QB steps up in the 2009 draft if Trent doesn't hack it. No to a QB at 11
RB: Rashard Meadenhall and Jonathan Stewart stepped up at the Combine and Meadenhall has the look of a Franchise back. With Lynch with us, this would be a seriously unlikely selection, unless we have fallen in love with Meadenhall, and can trade Lynch for a high No1 next year. We'd still get production on the ground, but would not have improved the team. Are Meadenhall or Stewart better long term options in a cold climate? Whilst we all love what Marshawn did teams should always look to get better at all positions. No to a RB at 11
OL: No G or C, but at T there are two players maybe worthy of No11 in Clady and Chris Williams. With Peters and Walker, a very unlikely selection, but Walker has always been up and down, and a stellar bookend might be worth thinking about. An unlikely selection, but considering the big picture, I could see the reasoning behind it. No to a OL at 11
S: This is accepted to be a bad class. Only Kenny Phillips carries a Round 1 grade but No11 is too high for him and we have solid players here in Simpson and Whitner. Picking Phillips would not improve the team. No to a S at 11
LB: Whilst it seems to be topical to slag off Ellison lets consider his play. Drafted in R6, he was a very nice surprise in 2006, playing alongside Fletcher and Spikes/Crowell finishing impressively. He regressed in 2007, but was often alongside DiGiorgio, Stammer and Haggan. Due to his own injury he's yet to play with Poz. Is Ellison a guy who plays up or down to those beside him. Alongside Poz and Angelo, I could see him returning to his 2006 form. We cannot have 11 Pro-Bowlers on defence. Being the senior LB for periods last year might have been just too much and that was contributory to his struggles.
In the draft we see only Rivers and Connor with a R1 tag. But I don't believe it is a necessary position because.
Free agency is deeper at this position and we can grab a player here.
Rivers is a big fish in a poor draft. Would he be ahead of the LBs of 2009?
Rivers-Poz-Crowell is a very inexperienced corps
Surround Ellison with talented players, and he seems to play to their level
Unless we fix the DL, it doesn't matter who we have hereWhilst I can understand the clamour for Rivers, I think it would as unnecessary as drafting Brohm, Meadenhall or Clady. We have other needs, and if Ellison does not rebound all the way, we can still be a playoff team and find ourselves drafting a LB like Fauriniatis, Maualaga or Lee, who would easily be a top15 selection this year. 2009 seems to be a much better class for LBs and therefore we SHOULD NOT REACH in this one. No to a LB at 11
After consideration I feel we have two options at No11. If Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie is available, I would select him as I think it provides us with size, speed and playmaking ability at a position of weakness (Greer is not a starter). If not then trading down is the next best option. All other considerations do not make sense.
Needs
DT: Our inability to stop the run makes this a crucial need. There is not a lot in Free Agency, though some players are on the trading block. The fact that so little is being asked for the likes of Rogers and Williams (apparently) does raise a flag for me, as to whether it could be a boom or bust deal. Trading does not always bring success.
Of the draft options, Dorsey seems to have a huge injury flag and will be compelled to play through pain for the rest of his career which maybe 2 or 8 years. Ellis did himself no favours at the combine with his speed , but remains the healthiest option though unlikely to fall so far.
of Balmer, Sims, Bryant, Moore and Laws, none advanced their cause so far, though I would be disappointed that if Sims, Moore and Laws are available at No41, we do not immediately grab them. No DT at 11
WR: Our biggest need on offence but none of the WR stepped up. There must be questions as to how quick Kelly is, Sweed did better than expect though has an injury flag, Hardy has a character flag, and Thomas has only produced in one year. What is remarkable about this draft is the depth at this position means we could select a WR deep into Day 2 - Rounds 4 or 5 - and still end up with Marques Colston Lite. No-one has stepped up to justify such a high selection. No WR at 11
DE: We've a lot of money tied up here but little production from the left. An improved interior may assist this, but also Denney may not full return to the average play he has provided so far. Considering the DEs available, Merling looks a player as does Harvey and Groves but No11 is too early for any of them. A DT is more important. No DE at 11
CB: A tandem of Greer & McGee with fingers crossed about Youboty. Mmmmm. Cornerback was a position that did step up. McKelvin was quick as was Jenkins and Cason, Talib, and Reggie Smith all now have a R1 grade. But Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie peformed like his cousin, Antonio, and a 6ft1, 184lbs corner who runs 4.28 in the 40 may be a selection to good to miss even if a lockdown corner isn't 100% necessary in the Cover2 defence. Worth considering at 11
TE: There are several guys who would be an asset to the Bills, maybe straight into the line up on Day1, but considering the two best at the combine, Davis and Keller are undersized, we shouldn't look at this until Day2. None have a Round1 grade and at No11 would be an insane selection. No TE at 11
Nice but not neccessary
QB: Brohm still available would be pause for thought especially as next years QB class looks light. We might be able to leverage a team's desire for Brohm to trade down, but ultimately I see Edwards being given a full starting season, and the Bills having their fingers crossed that a QB steps up in the 2009 draft if Trent doesn't hack it. No to a QB at 11
RB: Rashard Meadenhall and Jonathan Stewart stepped up at the Combine and Meadenhall has the look of a Franchise back. With Lynch with us, this would be a seriously unlikely selection, unless we have fallen in love with Meadenhall, and can trade Lynch for a high No1 next year. We'd still get production on the ground, but would not have improved the team. Are Meadenhall or Stewart better long term options in a cold climate? Whilst we all love what Marshawn did teams should always look to get better at all positions. No to a RB at 11
OL: No G or C, but at T there are two players maybe worthy of No11 in Clady and Chris Williams. With Peters and Walker, a very unlikely selection, but Walker has always been up and down, and a stellar bookend might be worth thinking about. An unlikely selection, but considering the big picture, I could see the reasoning behind it. No to a OL at 11
S: This is accepted to be a bad class. Only Kenny Phillips carries a Round 1 grade but No11 is too high for him and we have solid players here in Simpson and Whitner. Picking Phillips would not improve the team. No to a S at 11
LB: Whilst it seems to be topical to slag off Ellison lets consider his play. Drafted in R6, he was a very nice surprise in 2006, playing alongside Fletcher and Spikes/Crowell finishing impressively. He regressed in 2007, but was often alongside DiGiorgio, Stammer and Haggan. Due to his own injury he's yet to play with Poz. Is Ellison a guy who plays up or down to those beside him. Alongside Poz and Angelo, I could see him returning to his 2006 form. We cannot have 11 Pro-Bowlers on defence. Being the senior LB for periods last year might have been just too much and that was contributory to his struggles.
In the draft we see only Rivers and Connor with a R1 tag. But I don't believe it is a necessary position because.
Free agency is deeper at this position and we can grab a player here.
Rivers is a big fish in a poor draft. Would he be ahead of the LBs of 2009?
Rivers-Poz-Crowell is a very inexperienced corps
Surround Ellison with talented players, and he seems to play to their level
Unless we fix the DL, it doesn't matter who we have hereWhilst I can understand the clamour for Rivers, I think it would as unnecessary as drafting Brohm, Meadenhall or Clady. We have other needs, and if Ellison does not rebound all the way, we can still be a playoff team and find ourselves drafting a LB like Fauriniatis, Maualaga or Lee, who would easily be a top15 selection this year. 2009 seems to be a much better class for LBs and therefore we SHOULD NOT REACH in this one. No to a LB at 11
After consideration I feel we have two options at No11. If Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie is available, I would select him as I think it provides us with size, speed and playmaking ability at a position of weakness (Greer is not a starter). If not then trading down is the next best option. All other considerations do not make sense.