Grade the Bills Draft

[Dr. Lecter]

I am getting this poll up first???

:lolpoint: Meathead

[Dr. Lecter]

BTW, I generally hate grading drafts until the players play, but every media outlet will do the same tomorrow.

[chernobylwraiths]

I'm siding with my boys Bert and Ernie or whatever his name is.

[shelby]

B. i wish we had drafted a different TE. But i am thrilled with McKelvin, Hardy, and Simms. The later round players i don't know enough about to have an opinion, yet.

[FlyingDutchman]

I think whenever you can come out of the draft with two starters you can consider your draft successful. We plugged are two biggest holes with the top guys on our board. I like that we took a pass rusher. I think our draft took a different direction when Rucker was taken a few picks before us. I wish we got a better TE, but all in all id consider it a success.

[DraftBoy]

I gave it a C since +/- were not avail. Ill have a more indepth review done tonight and hopefully posted by tomorrow on the FP.

[YardRat]

I'm not going to give it a grade yet, but to repeat what I said in the 'different perspective' thread I think we did pretty well. Would've like to see a center and maybe a DT mixed in somewhere, but what the hell, you can't have it all.

[OpIv37]

C.

First two picks are good- it reminds me a little of last year. If someone said 3 days ago that we'd end up with McKelvin and Hardy without trading up, everyone would think they were nuts.

I also like the Ellis pick- I've never been a big fan of any of our DE's and he could be an upgrade. At the very least he'll add to the rotation and we won't have to see Ryan Neill on the field on crucial 4th quarter drives. My only complaint about this is that we didn't go offense- we're basically out of options for fixing the O now.

After that, it goes downhill fast. Did we really need 3 CB's in 10 picks, especially with the offense being in such dire straits? Fine sounds like a Schouman clone and Johnson sounds like a Josh Reed clone, although adding another big receiver isn't entirely a bad thing. Bell and Bowen could provide needed depth.

The Omon pick just boggles the mind- why would we take a small school RB when RB is probably our strongest position?

My biggest complaint is that the draft was our last chance to improve the offense, and the only potential contributor we added was Hardy. I don't see it being enough.

[coastal]

If Reggie Corner can handle Wes Welker I'll give the draft a B.

[Scumbag College]

B.

McKelvin is a very good CB, however I wish the Bills would have taken a little more time and tried a little harder to trade down. Hardy is a good pick, he fills a need that hasn't been addressed for a very long time. Ellis was the best DE left on the board and with some good coaching I think can come right in and make a difference. The Corner pick was basically to try to stop the Pats 4 and 5 wide sets. Fine is questionable, not much of an athlete compared to some of the other TEs that were available. Bowen is a nice fifth round pick whom produced in college. I love the Omon pick, he can come in and compete for the second and third RB spots, he put up crazy numbers and can run for a 225 lb guy. Bell won't see the field until 2009 at the earliest, it's a good gamble to take in the seventh round. Johnson is a good size, speed WR, had 13 TDs is senior year. Cox can compete for a spot.

[Dr. Lecter]

C.

First two picks are good- it reminds me a little of last year. If someone said 3 days ago that we'd end up with McKelvin and Hardy without trading up, everyone would think they were nuts.

I also like the Ellis pick- I've never been a big fan of any of our DE's and he could be an upgrade. At the very least he'll add to the rotation and we won't have to see Ryan Neill on the field on crucial 4th quarter drives. My only complaint about this is that we didn't go offense- we're basically out of options for fixing the O now.

After that, it goes downhill fast. Did we really need 3 CB's in 10 picks, especially with the offense being in such dire straits? Fine sounds like a Schouman clone and Johnson sounds like a Josh Reed clone, although adding another big receiver isn't entirely a bad thing. Bell and Bowen could provide needed depth.

The Omon pick just boggles the mind- why would we take a small school RB when RB is probably our strongest position?

My biggest complaint is that the draft was our last chance to improve the offense, and the only potential contributor we added was Hardy. I don't see it being enough.

Don't the first two rounds carry more weight for you?

As for the RB, he was the best player out there. The idea of drafting to fill positional "needs" after the 3rd round boggle smy mind. There is not one NFL team that does that.

And who else could have they drafted after the 3rd round to improve the offense immediately?

[Johnny Bugmenot]

B-.

James Hardy was an excellent pick. Leodis McKelvin was a decent selection. The rest... mediocre.

[PECKERWOOD]

I gave them a D. I liked the first 3 rounds but they **** the bed on the rest of the draft. Reggie Corner and Derek Fine? GIVE ME A ****ING BREAK. I bet you we could of got Corner in the 5th, he isn't bad but we reached, imo. I'm really disappointed we didn't get Schmitt or Hillis, they both could've been had. We could've had Kellen Davis over a bum like Derek Fine, he wasn't even one of Kansas' main targets. I'm extremely disappointed right now.

[Devin]

Fantastic draft. A solid B maybe B+.

Filled holes with great players and added some solid depth. All you can ask for.

[hydro]

Fantastic draft. A solid B maybe B+.

Filled holes with great players and added some solid depth. All you can ask for.

:homer: :up:

[mybills]

I thought it was great. I don't care if anyone laughs at me.
And it's about time they used our 1st for something we actually need.

[Dr. Lecter]

I thought it was great. I don't care if anyone laughs at me.
And it's about time they used our 1st for something we actually need.

I liked the draft too, but also enjoy laughing at you even if I need to create a reason. So

:lolpoint: mybills.

[THE END OF ALL DAYS]

I was going to vote for F just because it was funny, but the draft was fine in my opinon. what the hell.. not many after the 3 rd make the team anyway... only like 25% of 4th rounders make the roster, so most of the action was in the first 3 rounds.. and we did fine there

[MikeInRoch]

Even if you don't like the late rounds, you can't put nearly as much weight on them as the early rounds. They just don't matter as much. Therefore, B.

[DraftBoy]

Even if you don't like the late rounds, you can't put nearly as much weight on them as the early rounds. They just don't matter as much. Therefore, B.

Lets dispose of this twisted logic now. The draft is not considered successes or failures based on what you do on Day 1. The good GMs like Polian and Parcells are judged because they find talent on Day 2. If anything some people look at the success and failures rates in the later rounds as more important then in the early rounds.

[chernobylwraiths]

It is definitely an F. These guys haven't helped the team at all. I mean they haven't played one down in the NFL yet. There are guys bound of the Hall of Fame that were taken in the 7th round and we passed them by. WTF? We should have just traded all our picks for Roy Williams, and Pacman Jones. There, we have just solved our DB and WR problems.

[chernobylwraiths]

Lets dispose of this twisted logic now. The draft is not considered successes or failures based on what you do on Day 1. The good GMs like Polian and Parcells are judged because they find talent on Day 2. If anything some people look at the success and failures rates in the later rounds as more important then in the early rounds.

Still stinging because they missed a couple guys that you still had high on your board? :D

[Dr. Lecter]

BTW, the ESPN headline (it is an Insider story) reads:
Kansas City, Pittsburgh, Washington, Buffalo and Miami all had a great weekend. Tennessee and Houston? Not so much. If you missed any of it, here's the skinny on every pick from 1 to 252.

They are not the gospel, but how often does ESPN compliment Buffalo?

[LtFinFan66]

BTW, the ESPN headline (it is an Insider story) reads:
Kansas City, Pittsburgh, Washington, Buffalo and Miami all had a great weekend. Tennessee and Houston? Not so much. If you missed any of it, here's the skinny on every pick from 1 to 252.

They are not the gospel, but how often does ESPN compliment Buffalo?and Miami in the same sentence

[Dr. Lecter]

and Miami in the same sentence

I think both teams did well, but Miami need a few more Michigan players. :D

[OpIv37]

Don't the first two rounds carry more weight for you?

As for the RB, he was the best player out there. The idea of drafting to fill positional "needs" after the 3rd round boggle smy mind. There is not one NFL team that does that.

And who else could have they drafted after the 3rd round to improve the offense immediately?

When it comes to grading the draft, there are two main questions:
1. Did we get good players?
2. Did we fill positions of need?

The answer to the first one is a Yes, at least through the first three rounds. The answer to the second is no. We got three players at the SAME position, did nothing about C, and did not get one of the better TE's in this draft.

You can sit there and say "well teams don't draft to fill needs after the 3rd round." Fine. When and how exactly are we going to fill our needs on offense? They were neglected in FA and they were neglected early in the draft- that means there are two options left: late in the draft, and doing nothing. Our FO chose to do nothing and it will show on the field.

And choosing an RB is just plain stupid. I know it's late in the draft and whoever we pick probably won't be an impact player anyway, but a shot in the dark at a position of need is better than a shot in the dark at our strongest position.

[Johnny Bugmenot]

UDFA period is just beginning. You can occasionally get a good talent out of those.

Besides, not to shock the world, but Duke Preston is a far better center than he is a guard. He and Fowler are adequate for now. If we find someone better, great, but let's not act like we're doomed. The main issue with this team's performance last year was the red zone. They quite simply couldn't get in the end zone. A big WR will go a long way toward fixing that problem.

[OpIv37]

UDFA period is just beginning. You can occasionally get a good talent out of those.

Besides, not to shock the world, but Duke Preston is a far better center than he is a guard. He and Fowler are adequate for now. If we find someone better, great, but let's not act like we're doomed. The main issue with this team's performance last year was the red zone. They quite simply couldn't get in the end zone. A big WR will go a long way toward fixing that problem.

we were the 30th ranked offense last year- the problems went a LOT further than just the red zone. Neither Fowler nor Preston are very good- Fowler gets pushed back into the hole on almost every play, and he never opens a running lane. And if Preston's a better center than guard, he should be moved over.

UDFA impact players are few and far between- it's nice when you get them, but we shouldn't count on them as fans and the FO certainly shouldn't count on them.

[Michael82]

I loved Day 1, and I also really liked the Ellis pick. The rest of the picks really had me scratching my head. It's almost as if the front office was too busy celebrating Day 1's pick to care and then just had Modrak pick whatever "gems" he liked. :ill: However, the 1st 3 picks alone make this a good draft. I'll give it a B-

[Michael82]

I will say this, I'm very annoyed that they didn't get any extra OL depth except for a ****ing 7th rounder. :mad:

[kernowboy]

I gave it a C.

Whilst not many players last long on the roster after Round3, it is Championship winning and SuperBowl winning teams that do.

The Giants had significant contributions from deOssie (4), Boss (5), Johnson (7) and Bradshaw (7) last year.

I don't see this group having the same success.

For me a steal is not selecting a small school prospect and calling ourselves clever as we think no-one else noticed them, but taking a player in the 6th who had graded out as a 2nd round prospect.

[Jan Reimers]

I would give the first three Picks an A+, the last 5 (Rounds 5-7) a B+, and Round 4 a D. Too many good players left to take a small, slow Corner at 114, and Derek is not Fine, IMHO.

But the Bills are way smarter than I, so I'll wait and see, and hope to be pleasantly surprised.

[Dr. Lecter]

And choosing an RB is just plain stupid. I know it's late in the draft and whoever we pick probably won't be an impact player anyway, but a shot in the dark at a position of need is better than a shot in the dark at our strongest position.

You do know that there are exactly ZERO NFL teams that draft for need in the later rounds, don't you? (Short of getting a kicker or punter)

None.

If this guy is or will be an upgrade over Fred Jackson, I see no harm.

[YardRat]

Need isn't completely ignored, though, either Doc. If there are six players available with relatively the same grade on day 2 when your pick comes up you have to take the guy that fills a need.

[Dr. Lecter]

I don't disagree with that, but if the grades are not all that close you go with the highest grade.

[TacklingDummy]

Bring back Tom Donahoe. This draft blew, imo.

[mysticsoto]

BTW, the ESPN headline (it is an Insider story) reads:
Kansas City, Pittsburgh, Washington, Buffalo and Miami all had a great weekend. Tennessee and Houston? Not so much. If you missed any of it, here's the skinny on every pick from 1 to 252.

They are not the gospel, but how often does ESPN compliment Buffalo?
NFLN also gave us props as having a good draft and one of the guys after the draft said the Bills were flying under the radar and that people should take notice of them.

As MikeInRoch said, you have to weigh the 1st 2 rds much more than the others. If Lecter would have put +'s and -'s, I would have said a B-. The 1st 2 picks were very decent, I'm so-so on Ellis, Johnson and Demetrious Bell pick, but felt, at most 1 CB more should have been picked (and even that would have been questionable in my mind) better LBs and TEs were available, yet another RB was...ludicrous and no Center to groom...though they can still grab a decent one in UDFA and make up for that. Fernando Velasco is still out there and Brennan Carvalho also...And actually, I don't remember anyone grabbing Doug Legursky. He might actually be the best guy to grab!

[Dr. Lecter]

Bring back Tom Donahoe. This draft blew, imo.

He would have drafted big names!

[Luisito23]

B.

McKelvin is a very good CB, however I wish the Bills would have taken a little more time and tried a little harder to trade down. Hardy is a good pick, he fills a need that hasn't been addressed for a very long time. Ellis was the best DE left on the board and with some good coaching I think can come right in and make a difference. The Corner pick was basically to try to stop the Pats 4 and 5 wide sets. Fine is questionable, not much of an athlete compared to some of the other TEs that were available. Bowen is a nice fifth round pick whom produced in college. I love the Omon pick, he can come in and compete for the second and third RB spots, he put up crazy numbers and can run for a 225 lb guy. Bell won't see the field until 2009 at the earliest, it's a good gamble to take in the seventh round. Johnson is a good size, speed WR, had 13 TDs is senior year. Cox can compete for a spot.


Your college is scumb, but this post is not!....:goodpost:

[User Manuel]

Modrak and staff have done nothing to lead me to believe this wont be a great class.

[don137]

BTW, the ESPN headline (it is an Insider story) reads:
Kansas City, Pittsburgh, Washington, Buffalo and Miami all had a great weekend. Tennessee and Houston? Not so much. If you missed any of it, here's the skinny on every pick from 1 to 252.

They are not the gospel, but how often does ESPN compliment Buffalo?

The thing about it is Buffalo did it without having the #1 overall pick in each round and without having two round one picks like KC who lost Jarred Allen in the process. Those two better have good drafts.
Funny thing is a lot of the people that cricized this draft are the same people that crititcize the draft every year despite the last two years having excellent drafts.

[HHURRICANE]

It's a C.

Getting a starting CB and the WR we wanted was great.

I think the Bills lost their minds after that. I see a ton of wasted picks. We picked up like 5 CJ Ah YOUs.

[Bert102176]

def. had to give them an F

[blackonyx89]

B-. They overlooked higher caliber, bigger name players for some reason, but got ok talent instead.

[JerseyBoofaloBills]

i liked the draft, it wasnt too bad..the only thing that pissed me off, was that in the fourth round, that TE from Mich. State was there, Davis i believe? and we take corner..im pretty sure corner coulda been there 5th..but other than that, i hope derek fine comes out an shows us something, cause its pretty scary that fine can start..

[JerseyBoofaloBills]

oh but..i give them a C.

[hydro]

def. had to give them an F

Surprise of the century!

[BlackMetalNinja]

Bert is officially my new favorite Zoner after this weekend... I was laughing my ass off after every pick yesterday.

[Historian]

Solid B.

The Bills cheaped out as usual, drafting a few "projects" (Anybody know what Leif Larsen's doing these days?) but overall, I feel they filled the needs that they have.

[bigbub2352]

C- way to many reachs in the second day

[feelthepain]

The thing about it is Buffalo did it without having the #1 overall pick in each round and without having two round one picks like KC who lost Jarred Allen in the process. Those two better have good drafts.
Funny thing is a lot of the people that cricized this draft are the same people that crititcize the draft every year despite the last two years having excellent drafts.

How can you call a draft excellent without 1 pro bowler or a winning record or an offense and defense that rank among the best due to the addtions of those "excellent" draft picks? Just being a starter is hardly proof you're a great football player or that you're a great addtion. You have to consider who was in front of them when they won their starting jobs.

An example: Name one draft pick you landed in your opinion of an "excellent draft" that replaced a sure fire starter or pro bowler. Or name one player you drafted that's elite. Marshawn comes the closest, but it's just one season and he didn't make the pro bowl and he sure as heck didn't replace anyone worth talking about. I think there could be a serious flaw in your opinion of your DP's.

[justasportsfan]

An example: Name one draft pick you landed in your opinion of an "excellent draft" that replaced a sure fire starter or pro bowler. Or name one player you drafted that's elite..
we just look at Ginn and Beck and know we've been drafting well :up:

[ddaryl]

I gave em a B just for day 1... day 2 is still a wait and see.

the only thing I can say about our day 2 is the Bills trusted THEIR board not the interent mock drafts that we fans rely on.

[Michael82]

It's a C.

Getting a starting CB and the WR we wanted was great.

I think the Bills lost their minds after that. I see a ton of wasted picks. We picked up like 5 CJ Ah YOUs.
I think they were smoking too much wacky tobacky in day 2. :ill:

[OpIv37]

You do know that there are exactly ZERO NFL teams that draft for need in the later rounds, don't you? (Short of getting a kicker or punter)

None.

If this guy is or will be an upgrade over Fred Jackson, I see no harm.

Don't care because other NFL teams fill holes through trades and FA's. We don't- we just ignore them and hope they'll go away. The holes have to be filled somehow, and to say "no NFL teams draft for need in the later rounds" is just a BS excuse to defend the fact that our FO didn't fill the holes.

And did you watch Fred Jackson last year? He did really well- there is little if any chance that some sixth round small school RB will do that well.

[Dr. Lecter]

Don't care because other NFL teams fill holes through trades and FA's. We don't- we just ignore them and hope they'll go away. The holes have to be filled somehow, and to say "no NFL teams draft for need in the later rounds" is just a BS excuse to defend the fact that our FO didn't fill the holes.

And did you watch Fred Jackson last year? He did really well- there is little if any chance that some sixth round small school RB will do that well.

You are right. The FO did not fill any holes this year.

C'mon. That is crap and you know it.

And it is not a BS excuse. It is the truth and you can't dispute it. Polian to Butler to Smith to Beathard and on and on all have always said you draft BPA, especially in the later rounds.

As for Fred Jackson he was OK.

But I guess you are satisfied with mediocrity. [/sarcasm off]

BTW, there is also little if any chance the Bills find a center in round 6 to take over this year for Fowler. Or a TE to be better than Royal.

[OpIv37]

You are right. The FO did not fill any holes this year.

C'mon. That is crap and you know it.

And it is not a BS excuse. It is the truth and you can't dispute it. Polian to Butler to Smith to Beathard and on and on all have always said you draft BPA, especially in the later rounds.

As for Fred Jackson he was OK.

But I guess you are satisfied with mediocrity. [/sarcasm off]

BTW, there is also little if any chance the Bills find a center in round 6 to take over this year for Fowler. Or a TE to be better than Royal.

Fred Jackson is a #3 running back- name one #3 running back in the league that's better. As a starter I'd agree we can do better. But he's not the starter.

The Bills' FO did not fill any holes on offense and you know it. Teyo Johnson and Courtney Anderson? Some no-name fullback? No C or depth on the OL? Give me a ****ing break. The only position on the O that was upgraded is WR and that's with a rookie.

Butler, Polian, Smith didn't do it- poor example. Their teams are GOOD and they don't have as many needs as we do, and they find other ways of addressing those needs. You're comparing the Bills' approach to ONE aspect of their approach without accounting for their success or everything else they've done.

[Dr. Lecter]

Fred Jackson is a #3 running back- name one #3 running back in the league that's better. As a starter I'd agree we can do better. But he's not the starter.

The Bills' FO did not fill any holes on offense and you know it. Teyo Johnson and Courtney Anderson? Some no-name fullback? No C or depth on the OL? Give me a ****ing break. The only position on the O that was upgraded is WR and that's with a rookie.

Butler, Polian, Smith didn't do it- poor example. Their teams are GOOD and they don't have as many needs as we do, and they find other ways of addressing those needs. You're comparing the Bills' approach to ONE aspect of their approach without accounting for their success or everything else they've done.

Jackson is the #3 back? Who is #2 right now? I think you are off in your numbers here.

And no, they did not fill holes on offense. But they did on defense. You made sound as if they did not fill any holes. There are only so many they can fill at one time, and they did not "ignore" the needs. They had people in and worked with them. Did not sign them clearly, but they did not ignore.

As for that being one aspect of their approach, it was/is kinda of a big one. And they also used that approach while building teams.

Look at it this way - Did NE "need" a QB when they drafted Brady?

I am not comparing Brady to Omon. Not at all. But you understand the concept.

Again this is a 6th round pick - hardly worth our energy. The later rounds are to take flyers on developmental guys. And that is what they did. Except for the once every coupleof years Marques Colston, you do not get production from these players for 2-3 years. So why worry about position as the primary concern?

[OpIv37]

Jackson is the #3 back? Who is #2 right now? I think you are off in your numbers here.

And no, they did not fill holes on offense. But they did on defense. You made sound as if they did not fill any holes. There are only so many they can fill at one time, and they did not "ignore" the needs. They had people in and worked with them. Did not sign them clearly, but they did not ignore.

As for that being one aspect of their approach, it was/is kinda of a big one. And they also used that approach while building teams.

Look at it this way - Did NE "need" a QB when they drafted Brady?

I am not comparing Brady to Omon. Not at all. But you understand the concept.

Again this is a 6th round pick - hardly worth our energy. The later rounds are to take flyers on developmental guys. And that is what they did. Except for the once every coupleof years Marques Colston, you do not get production from these players for 2-3 years. So why worry about position as the primary concern?

because we have GLARING needs at those positions. You can say the FO filled holes on D and that they tried to fill holes on O, and that they can only fill so many needs at once. And all of that may very well be true, except for one problem: it doesn't make the offense that takes the field on Sunday afternoons any better.

I take the opposite approach- as long as we're taking long shots, they should be at positions of need. If Omon comes out and kicks ass, then what happens? We get McGahee/Henry all over again? We still have no TE's or WR's or OL depth.

I agree that it's certainly not the best way of filling holes, but a 1 in a million shot is better than no shot at all.

[BlackMetalNinja]

Holy Crap Op you kill me...

There is no way a 6th rd small school draft pick could possibly replace an undrafted small school Free Agent!

For the record I like Jackson too, but depth isn't a bad thing and if the kid doesn't make the roster... oh well. Not to mention, at this point I see Jackson as the #2 back, this kid could be the 3rd pretty easily.