Sporting News Magazine didn't like our draft

[Demon]

Just got my Sporting News magazine today in the mail and here's how they grade the draft.....

1. Detriot A+
2. St Louis A
3. Houston A
4. Philadelphia A
5. Pittsburgh A
6. Dallas A-
7. Minnesota A-
8. Cincinatti A-
9. New England A- (Comment: Choosing Ty Warren 13th was a bit early, but they really worked this draft and ended up with a 1st round next year and a couple potential starters.)
10. Baltimore A-

18. NY Jets B (Comment: The 1st round trade up worked well for the Jets; DT Dewayne Robertson is a perfect fit for the defense run by Herm Edwards and Ted Cottrell.)

24. Buffalo C+ (Comment: The Bills took a big risk on a player who plays a position that wasn't a need. That said, RB Willis McGahee could end up looking like the best pick of the draft.)

28. Miami C (Comment: The Dolphins had few high picks to work with and were stymied in attempts to move up. If you consider Ricky Williams part of the draft, it doesn't look so bad.)

30. Kansas City C-
31. Arizona C-
32. Oakland D

They also said Chris Kalsay is the only play who will be battling for regular playing time and Crowell should have a good impact on special teams.

I like the sporting news people alot (thats why i subscribe to their magazine lol) and i think alot of the stuff they say is true, but noway was our draft that low. They say Aikens will be a average WR (3rd-4th type). Besides Kalsay and McGahee they didn't really like the other picks.

[Earthquake Enyart]

What a surprise. St. Louis got an A. :eek:

They are so biased... :shakeno:

[ArcticWildMan]

How could they give the Cards a C-???? :eek:

[TypicalBill]

Jacksonville had one of the top 3 drafts IMO, they didn't get into the top 10?

[Ingtar33]

Originally posted by ArcticWildMan
How could they give the Cards a C-???? :eek:

easy... the cards traded away a #6 for two 1st rounders and a second, then promptly drafted 2 2nd rounders in the first (Pace and Johnson), a 3rd to 4th rounder in the 2nd (Anquan Bolden), and only one NFL ready prospect the rest of the way (Hayes in the 3rd)... Truthfully, a lot of us in the War room were laughing our heads off at the 'zona picks... one guy in particular said, "what, are they trying to waste their picks?!"

[ArcticWildMan]

That's what I meant Ingtar. I think a C- is being way too nice!! I'd grade them as an F!!!

[northernbillfan]

Back peddaling now AWM. ;)

My question is how can they give Minny an A?

This is the second year they blew their pick, and they will still have to give 7th money to their guy instead of 9th.

[venis2k1]

Minny cought my eye too, I think that Williams was a HUGE reach.

[venis2k1]

ST. Louis getting Kennedy at 12 may be seen as a steal in a few years.

[Demon]

I dont like their grades but Minnesota i think is a good grade. Kevin Williams is just what they need and they also got EJ Henderson who was predicted early/mid first round in many mock drafts. WR Nate Burleson could be a very decent #2/3 WR and Onterrio Smith will b a very decent backup for Bennett.

Also Mike Nattiel is a solid pick at 6th round who could actually be a starter for them.

[Billsouth]

its always going to be difficult for teams drafting late to have a "good draft" for mags like sporting news because by defininition they are picking over a turkey that has already been eaten.

however, none of them felt that the bucs had a good draft last year, or that the pats had a good draft the year before. If success in the draft is determined by getting the best rated players then I am glad we got a C rating because that means we drafted late. Remember during the superbowl years we never were rated as having a "good draft."

[WG]

"24. Buffalo C+ (Comment: The Bills took a big risk on a player who plays a position that wasn't a need. That said, RB Willis McGahee could end up looking like the best pick of the draft.)"

I can't speak for the rest of the teams, and quite frankly, I haven't even looked yet. But they are right on w/ us. If you go read their online analysis, they say that nothing we selected will help us this year. They're right.

100% of this draft is for future years in spite of the fact that there were several positions that we could have used this season. Backup OL-men, backup WR, backup/starting LBs. I know most of you are ready to put Posey up on the wall, facetiously, but there's a good chance he won't be much better than Newman or Robinson.

McGahee, well, his upside is just as TSN says, a huge risk! No one can deny that. They can rationalize it away, but 3 major injuries in college and H.S. is probably more than any pro player expected to play at that position should overcome. Even Thurman's injury was his first I believe.

If you read up on Kelsay, the majority say he's primarily a run-defending DE w/ only so-so speed off the corner. Is that really what we need? I don't think so.

And I'm tellin' ya now, Crowell won't amount to much. He was a reach in the third IMO. I'm guessing he wouldn't have been selected if his surname hadn't already been floatin' around the NFL.

We don't need McGahee, and we won't need him next season either if Henry improves this season. If Kelsay starts this year, then we're hurtin' and it'll mean that McKenzie is washed up completely and that Jones didn't pan out.

This reaction to anyone criticizing our draft is just a mob-mentality "rah-rah Bills" mentality.

This draft will not help us out this season at all, and if it does, it'll likely only be out of a lack of decent options. Besides, our top two picks are both injury babies!

TSN is right on. It's a C+, and if we knew now the status of McGahee as being what he was at Miami, it would jump to an A+. On the flip side, right now, the players in rounds 2-7 being as unknown as they are, if it were known that McGahee's injuries would prevent him from being great in the NFL, then the grade for this draft would be a D, solidly. Our 4th round picks, IMO, were a joke. For the life of me, I cannot imagine that there were not a couple of better players out there. I wish we had played the "best player available" scenario in rounds 2, 3, and 4 too!

C+, that's what I'll run with as well! It's way too risky to assign it anything higher at this point!

[Ebenezer]

Wys, I don't disagree but I will say this. The way that TD appears to be operating I can live with drafting for the future. If TD is set on and continues to pick up these many free agents each year then I have no problem using the draft as a "foundation for the future". My biggest beef against Butler was the fact that he never did what was necessary to move bodies in that could help immediately (except in isolated years) and he never moved down to get more picks to help the future. TD is steering a sane course for building. As a result the low grades are justified...until we look at this, and all drafts, 3 to 4 years down the road.

[WG]

OK, fine. But wouldn't have EJ Henderson been "future" too, and present?

Why does future have to mean "lack of present?"

As well, "this future" is anything but guaranteed, eh. That's my point. Much of the aire around here is that there's some sort of guarantee once this season goes by. This just in, there isn't.

[Lone Stranger]

I'm with WYS on this one. Except I think that a C+ is quite generous. We did not serioulsy beef up our offensive and defensive lines. TD stated that this draft was loaded with defensive lineman. Well we should have stocked up because Williams and Adams are 31 and 30 respectively. They may only have a year or two left.

[WG]

AMEN!

Heck, Adams may already be finished. Those enormous tackles have their years shortened due to their weight.

[Schobel94]

Stocked up on who? William Joseph? That guy is an underachieving overweight overrated player. All the best D-linemen were gone, we could have traded up, but would you be willing to give up a 2nd round pick? Not me. We could have gone O-line, but we are looking for depth, and Steinbach is a starter.

[WG]

OK 94, and Crowell and Kelsay are gonna be enormous impact players and McGahee will have 20 TDs on 2K yards this year. You're obviously thinking in one dimension here.

Let's just drop it...

[mikemac2001]

i liked the bills draft mcgahee is a chance but look at the upside of it ...we didnt even have a pick ....then we still get the guy we mgiht have drafted in that spot in the 2nd. i like how we improved are special teams and return game with the draft ....then i like this kid sam aiken Tall Great route runner can catch thats what a WR should be. got an alright G maybe can develop him. but you really cant GRADE DRAFTS NOW

[mikemac2001]

Schobel94 work on sig to make it fit a little better ......Like i did DOnt you like it ;)

[WG]

You're right about that, you can't grade drafts now. You have to wait.

All you can do now is lament about us not having addressed any of our real needs in a major way.

I see little reason to be excited for this upcoming season insofar as our draft goes however. Seems like many are now more excited for '04 than this season.

[Schobel94]

No, I never said they will be awsome players, but youve completely dismissed them eventhough youve probably never seen one of their college games let alone one NFL game. You cant rate a player you have no idea about. The guys you wanted to pick you liked cuz they were on the mock drafts, and Kiper talked about them, but you dont really know anthing about them or their abilities, neither do I! But you know who does, Donahoe!!! Cuz its his job and he's damn good at it! He's proven that, and he deserves the benifet of the doubt.

Your self effacing demeanor belies your arrogance when you have nothing to be arrogant about! Why do you think you know more than Donahoe, what makes you think this, what makes you think you are so much smarter than he is?

[WG]

I have no idea what you're talking about. There's little argument that Henderson was the best MLB in the draft.

There's no argument that Peterson would have been a GREAT pick in round 3.

But again, you keep missing the mark here. They would have met needs. Now read that sentence again. :D Needs!!! Hellooo!

Even Rien Long in the 4th would have met a need. If not for an immediate starter, then for a backup.

What's funny is that I ridicule our 3rd rounder for being a tweener w/o the skills to play S, and get lambasted for it. Then, I just read the review of Nick Barnett, the very first LB and OLB taken in the draft. Well, he's the exact same size as Crowell, but only better, and they said about his shortcomings just what I said about Crowell, who was picked over two rounds later and I'm told that I'm nuts. ;)

Either way, he didn't meet a big need and his NFL success will be sketchy from the get go.

[Schobel94]

I cant speak on behalf of the Packers who took Barnett, but there are a lot of stupid people in charge, but TD is nt one of them. What I dont understand is why you think you would have made better picks than TD when he obviously knows more than you do.

Where do you get this incredible mental power to pick out outstanding players? Please share it with me I must know! Were you born with them or did you aquire them in some freakish accident that endowed you with great NFL wisdom.

[WG]

I don't. It's called common sense. Some like to point out the couple of times that I've been incorrect, but I gotta tell ya, I've been right more often than I've been wrong.

I said the exact same thing last year w/ Denney! "Why did we trade up for a guy who wasn't on anyone's list until 4 or 5 and take him in the second?" TD supposedly knew what he was doing and ascertained that Denney was a winner, eh.

Well, do you think he was worth trading up and taking in the 2nd for two very good picks? I don't! I stand by my last year's assessment.

What about Bannan? Were you high on him? I sure wasn't. Kevin Thomas may have been a hidden gem. Wire, I was big on him and he may still work out.

As to Reed, I was huge on him, ask anyone. Yet everyone raged that he isn't as good as Price. We'll see. But I'd take Reed over Price STILL in a heartbeat. He's the most prolific WR to have come out of the SEC ever! It was a no-brainer at #36.

Getting Mike Williams w/ #4 I don't particularly credit TD for. We absolutely had to draft an OT and he was clearly the guy. I can tell you that while everyone was raving about McKinney, I was also fighting an uphill battle saying that he was monstrously overrated! Who was right on that as just about everyone said I was nuts b/c he was the highest rated OT in the draft by many!

It only takes some common sense and some awareness of the types of players who succeed in the NFL and when. As well, it helps if you actually watch the players. That's why I am so big that we should have taken EJ Henderson. I live in the DC area and saw a lot of him at UMD.

Now, take Kelsay. Some say he'd have been a good first rounder too. I say TD would have had to have his head examined if he had taken Kelsay w/ the 23rd overall. I look at the write up on him and what I see is this; He succeeded due to his speed and technique but is not considered to have great speed. He's also undersized.

That tells me two things; first, in order for him to succeed he'll likely have to bulk up, right? Let's suppose that happens for the sake of argument since if it doesn't, he'll likely not be very good since it's considered a weakness. So if he sizes up, then how do we know he'll get faster? If he had to rely on his speed in college to beat his opponents, and since the level of speed of his opponents will improve dramatically from college to pro, doesn't it stand logically that if he's to be an asset to us, it'll likely be b/c he bulks up sizewise and makes a career on strength and size? Surely it won't be on speed!

Given all that, I just don't see good chances for success. Do you? If you say yes I know you're just screwin' w/ me. ;)

Here's his link:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfldraft/tracker/player?id=6822

As to Crowell, he's an undersized LB and doesn't have the skills to play S. So what do you think will happen? Most tweeners just like him don't excel! Sure, you may find one or two or three who did, but given the numbers the odds are that he won't. Big time!

So I'm just playin' the odds. I was big on Corey Moore and got burned by him. Too small even though he was MUCH faster than Crowell.

I'm not even gonna talk about our 4th rounders this year. I think those were two of the worst 4th rounders we've ever made. Go look at their profiles and see if there's even one thing that indicates that their chances of pro success are anything more than dubious.

There is no profile on McGee from what I could find. He comes from a school that is far from known for placing pro players.

Aiken I'm guessing we only drafted for returns.

So it's just a matter of simple common sense. You know what's funny is that I've been thru the ringer w/ many challenging me just like this. Then, when we sit down and watch a game, people are amazed at all the little stuff I point out as to the shortcomings in players and then after only one game they often say, "Yeah, now I see where you are coming from."

Most people just watch the game and follow where the ball goes. I watch everything. That's why I knew that McKinney was not nearly as good as everyone said. His hype was solely based on the fact that he played for Miami and due to his size. He may improve, but he wasn't going to be the player out of college that many said.

But let's backup to last year's draft. The #4 overall should have been a gimme and it was. Mike Williams was my guy too although earlier on I liked Mike Pearson out of Florida until we knew more about Williams injury. But Williams is the guy I wanted on draft day.

Reed was a no brainer and a result of the 35 picks before us leaving him on the table. Many had him possibly being the 2nd WR taken.

But after that, you really can't say that our draft was anything special last year. I like Wire, but a lot of people don't think he should start this year. He may very well amount to only a backup. The only other potential good draft pick is Kevin Thomas but even that's only based on a handful of games late last year and in a nickel position, not as a starting CB.

So in hindsight, I don't think last year's draft was particularly successful after the gimme picks. The real skill in the draft, and something the Bills used to excel at but I am raising an eyebrow to lately, is their round 3-6 picks.

This year's sucked IMO.

So to answer your question, if you watch the games, tape them, review them again, watch college players, look at the things that make players successful in the NFL vice college, see what skills players have and whether their deficiencies can be addressed or whether they overachieved in college due to mismatches that won't be present in the NFL, then you can tell quite a bit.

No GM makes perfect moves all the time, even the best ones. Many GMs, professionals who should know more than me, are abysmal. They get paid for it. I often think that sometimes the best people to make decisions are the ones removed from the policitics and PR of the entire thing.

BTW, here's some of the stuff I'm talking about observation wise. Some of it has really helped me clean house in fantasy football over the years:

Rookie QBs never do anything, period. Anomalies like Vick are singular exceptions.

You're better off drafting a MLB while it's easier to get your OLBs via Free-Agency. MLBs cost too much if they're good.

Rarely draft a QB in round 1, they hardly ever pan out.

Florida WRs haven't done squat in the NFL regardless of collegiate success. There've been some average ones, but great ones are unusual given their success at Florida.

Penn St. RBs, ditto for the most part, w/ exceptions.

LBs under 230 lbs. rarely do anything and if they're not much bigger, like Crowell, they had better have some height. 6'/236 ain't gonna cut it in the pros w/o some rare speed or other attributes.

As far as Crowell goes, I also looked at the fact that he performed well, although not fantastically, and that in a system that they say the coach designed around him. Well, he won't play ILB w/ the Bills, nor will he have a system that's designed to work around him. So how will this undersized tweener fare?

You tell me. But history suggests he won't fare well. A couple of guys here will name a few players who've succeeded, but there are countless others of his size who haven't such that the odds are highly against him.

Anyway, common sense, some knowledge about the players and an analysis of their strengths and whether or not it's their weaknesses being the type of stuff that can be worked on or not largely say much.

[PA Season Ticket Holder]

Let the Wys War 5 begin, :lol:

[WG]

Now, who are you that you know so much so as to condescend to me like that?

Just curious since you came at me?

Where you gettin' your info?

BTW, NFL football is the only sport that I rigidly follow as well. I spend very little watching much else other than NCAA tournament.

[PA Season Ticket Holder]

That has to be one of the longest post ever.

[WG]

BTW, here are the links for Kelsay and Crowell.

Why don't you tell me based on what they say about them, why you figure TD made excellent picks here?

Ante up... ;)

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfldraft/tracker/player?id=6822

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfldraft/tracker/player?id=6882

Here is why I don't think Kelsay was a good pick:

"Has good but not great quickness and quick-twitch off the ball."

This won't cut it in the NFL and something like that isn't likely to improve.

"Lacks size and will get engulfed by bigger offensive tackles."

All he's gonna face in the NFL are those 'bigger offensive tackles' that he got engulfed by, eh.

"Relies heavily on his speed."

Which was 'good not great' in college. That tells me it'll be downright inadequate in the pros. Again, speed is something that's not likely to improve much if at all.

"Is not as agile as teams want in a speed-rushing defensive end."

We need an agile DE. More of a team needs thing.

"Has a recent injury history."

Not good. So our top two picks are injury risks!

"Is strong but must get much stronger."

Can be improved, but given his lack of speed, he brings almost nothing to this team to be able to contribute immediately. Not good for a mid second rounder, IMO.

"Though his ability to play the run has improved, Kelsay doesn't show the ability to consistently beat superior competition."

Guess what? Superior competition that he fails to 'consistently beat' is exactly what he's gonna see in the NFL.

Here is why I don't think Crowell was a good pick:

At 6'0", 236, 4.74 40-time, he's not big enough to play MLB and sketchy at best for even OLB.

"Crowell played in a defense that was made for him as a senior, when he set a school record with 154 tackles and had 10-plus tackles in 11-of-14 games."

That won't be the case in Buffalo. He wasn't nearly as good at UVA the year prior when that wasn't the case.

"Not natural in coverage."

We need coverage LBs, so he doesn't fill a need there particularly. Again, more of a need thing. Limits his ability as a LB.

"Not fast."

Not good for an undersized LB.

"Not a big playmaker."

"Does not take on blockers well at times."

"Plays better going forward and will struggle in coverage. Lacks long speed."

"Questionable size in the middle, but may not have the speed to play "Will" at the next level."

Tells me he'd be average in the NFL on a good day.

Combine all that with the comments that he "plays bigger than his size and faster than his speed" and it tells me he's gonna be outmatched at "the next level." I certainly would have taken Kenny Peterson over him in a flash. Apparently Green Bay thought so too.

Make sense!

[Dozerdog]

:deadhorse:

[WG]

Even more, I'll tell you why I like the following instead of our draft, all of whom were available at the appropriate picks;

1. EJ Henderson, MLB, MD
2. Tyrone Calico, WR, Tenn
3. Kenny Peterson, DE, OSU
4. Rien Long, DT, WSU

EJ Henderson:

"led the team in tackles (175), tackles for loss (19½) and sacks (8½). Also had two interceptions. Was winner of Bednarik Award as nation's top defensive player. Also won Butkus Award as nation's top linebacker."

"150-26-6" in '01.

"Henderson is a big, strong, active, physical, aggressive, instinctive linebacker with excellent vision, awareness and game speed. He anticipates well and knows just when to hit the hole to get into the backfield and make plays for negative yardage. He covers much more ground than his speed would indicate and is a nonstop hustle guy. He can stack and shed at the point of attack, uses his hands well to shed and has a short, explosive burst to the ball. A quick-twitch type of athlete, he is adequate in pass coverage and can blitz. He can also get outside at times. Is willing to play hurt."

"Henderson plays faster than his timed speed and has outstanding instincts."

Instincts can't be taught. Most of his weaknesses are addressable. His pass coverage is OK it said, but doable.

Tyrone Calico:

Actually, I wouldn't have drafted him, but of the choices available after we were up, I'd have taken him over what we did in conjunction w/ this list.

"6-3, 223, 4.34"

GREAT size for a WR w/ speed!

"Has great size, long arms, big hands and excellent speed and athletic ability. He also is a physical blocker. Though he hasn't played against top-caliber competition regularly, in 2000 he beat Mississippi State CB Fred Smoot (current Redskins starter) for two touchdowns, including one acrobatic catch. Can separate and beat the jam and flashes ability to adjust. Has great leaping ability but doesn't always show it. Can beat defensive backs off the line of scrimmage. Has deep speed, can be effective on the fade route and in the red zone. Strong runner after the catch. More fast than quick. Comes out of his breaks quickly."

"outstanding combination of strength, size and speed"

Other than the lack of "soft hands", every single other one of his weaknesses are the types of things that can be worked on/taught.

Kenny Peterson:

"Very talented, athletic player who has shown flashes of greatness."

"Relentless, has a very quick get-off and shows explosive quickness off the ball shooting to inside gaps. Has good awareness and football intelligence. Makes good use of his hands. Pursues well laterally and can change directions quickly and close fast. Agile, athletic player who rotates throughout the game. Has big upside and potential. Plays hard and disruptive and uses leverage in bull rush. Good athlete, explosive pass-rusher and playmaker. Very strong for his size. Can play inside."

His knock is that he can't play inside. Who cares. He's exactly what we need outside on the end.

Rien Long:

Seems like the perfect fit for us, especially in the 4th round. The Titans took him and they sure seem to know how to pick DT talent since they're always 2 or 3 deep in DTs.

Long is what we need and his weaknesses can all be addressed. Lacks power and doesn't have the best pass-rush moves. If those are corrected, he seems like a very good 4th rounder capable of starting in a year or two.

Either way, he meets a dire need for backup DTs and a potential starter in a year or two.

[Schobel94]

Originally posted by Wys Guy
I look at the write up on him

This is exactly my point. Our talent evaluators spend countless hours pouring over videos, medical histories, and other info and you read a paragraph and think you know more than they do? I dont think so.

[EDS]

Henderson has back problems, is slow and undersized. Calico, while having great physical skills, never accomplished anything at a lower level of competition. Peterson, I like as a DT to rush the passer, but he is not a speed rushing end. Long is hard to judge, but given his size and production, worth a 4th rounder.

[WCoastFin]

"Sporting News Magazine didn't like our draft ".....can we blame them???

[The Spaz]

You sure can't blame them for you draft! Go Bills!