Peter King releases his latest mock

[T-Long]

WR Michael Floyd Notre Dame Sr. 6-3 224
(Should pick: Mark Barron, S, Alabama). Buffalo will break the Cardinals' hearts by stealing Floyd to pair with Stevie Johnson and give quarterback Ryan Fitzpatrick a true second weapon and bona fide deep threat. But I'd rather have the kind of enforcer in the secondary that so many teams covet. The 6-1, 213-pound Barron is a player whom multiple teams will try to trade up to get.

Pretty interesting to see Barron here....now both Mayock and King have linked Barron to the Bills.

[gonzo1105]

If your trying to build a dominant defense you go with SEC players and the only two that are worth the pick are Gilmore and Barron.

[CleveSteve]

Peter King I think has lost it.

Jags taking Gilmore at 7? Really? I guess they're happy throwing to Laurent robinson, Jarrett Dillard, and Brian Robiskie.

The Browns drafting weak-ass Martin to play RT with Cordy glenn still on the board? Then trading up for Weedon?

[Blacksheep71]

You build a defence from the trenches backwards - didn't Levy prove this?

And anyone who thinks Mark Anderson is a full time starter needs their head examined - he never has been and he never will be

[Bill Cody]

This encourages me. Maybe someone will want to trade up for our pick yet.

[kingJofNYC]

You build a defence from the trenches backwards - didn't Levy prove this?

And anyone who thinks Mark Anderson is a full time starter needs their head examined - he never has been and he never will be
Word, guy was almost out of the league until he resurrected his career last season.

The Giants beat the Pats with a pass rush, not because of their safety play. Take the best front 7 player or be a CB, we have no depth at that position. I'd love to have a guy like Ingram along with Anderson and Williams.

Ingram has played all over the field. He's played DT on passing downs, stand up rusher, DE. He does it all, best pass rush moves in the draft, great hand fighter and a terrific spin move.

[Buffalogic]

I think Barron would be a great pick but I prefer Floyd...

[Oaf]

The Giants beat the Pats with a pass rush, not because of their safety play.

They almost lost to the Pats because of their safety play. (see Welker drop)

[Beebe's Kid]

I am a BPA kind of dude...but I have to say that taking a safety at #10 would not be the sexy pick I was hoping for. I mean, how long are this guy's arms? Does he have the footwork? What's his Wonderlic score? ****.

I clearly am not the expert that many around here are...I mean, I don't even have my own mock...but I just feel that at #10 you take BPA, but you are allowed to be influenced by the aspect of need. I don't think there is a 10th best player...I think there are a lot of really good, potentially great players at that spot, and would definitely fill a hole on this team.

[kingJofNYC]

They almost lost to the Pats because of their safety play. (see Welker drop)

Outside of that one play, their safeties were good enough, especially with that front 4. I'd take our current safeties over the Giant safeties, so in that respect we're already ahead. Lets get another pass rusher and roll out 3 rushers along with Kyle and Dareus and get after QBs like we did in the 90s.

[Buffalogic]

Barron is an impact player on defense. A lot of people underrate him but he's going to be a really good pro

[Bert102176]

Peter King I think has lost it.

Jags taking Gilmore at 7? Really? I guess they're happy throwing to Laurent robinson, Jarrett Dillard, and Brian Robiskie.

The Browns drafting weak-ass Martin to play RT with Cordy glenn still on the board? Then trading up for Weedon?
-


Jags have Lee Evans also

[more cowbell]

Add Lombardi to that list of people who think the Bills will/should pick Barron

[baalworship]

Barron is an impact player on defense. A lot of people underrate him but he's going to be a really good pro


George Wilson is a really good pro. And he plays the same position.

[ublinkwescore]

I do not want a safety. wilson and byrd are a great tandem

[ublinkwescore]

I think Barron would be a great pick but I prefer Floyd...
or he could be roy williams version 2.0

[Slim]

or he could be roy williams version 2.0

This applies to both players.

No sure if serious...

[The Beef]

Not in love with Barron, however.

He may be BPA, and I know people don't want to hear it but...

You need to build a team that can match up and beat New England.

Putting Byrd, Wilson and Barron in the field helps you match up with GRONK, Hernandez, Welker and protect the middle of the field.

You can have a really unique nickel/dime package with Byrd, Wilson, Barron, and Scott all on the field.

I do expect to get a safety sometime, Scott is a hybrid guy, and there is Searcy.

It would be interesting, but I am very happy with our current tandem. If Nix thinks he can impact a game like Ed Reed then do what you have to do.

Personally the only Alabama defender I'd want at 10 is Hightower. Of the 4 guys I think he has the highest ceiling. He's already got an NFL body and plays violent. He'd bring a nasty to the defense at LB that we haven't had in a long time.

[ServoBillieves]

If it's Barron I want our 4th rounder from last year back.

[Cali512]

or he could be roy williams version 2.0



And Barron can be Michael Huff/Whitner part 2. Williams also pretty much was James Hardy. Big but cant run a route and are slow as hell

[The Jokeman]

If it's Barron I want our 4th rounder from last year back.
Which one as we had two? As don't you know our second 4th Rounders is good enough to play the arguably the most pivitol position on offense? Whereas our first 4th Rounders is only good enough to be a backup SS.

[ServoBillieves]

I thought you'd be able to put 2 and 2 together... I must have been wrong. Why draft Barron, as a team building through the draft, when you JUST drafted a SS last year in the mid rounds?

[The Jokeman]

I thought you'd be able to put 2 and 2 together... I must have been wrong. Why draft Barron, as a team building through the draft, when you JUST drafted a SS last year in the mid rounds?
I was posting that sarcastically as it was a shout out to those who think we don't need to draft a LT with our first pick. In other words, one of our fourth rounders is a back up SS that might start in a few years IF Wilson is ever let go when the other is expected to start at a very important position on offense.

[feldspar]

Can't wait until draft day. All these mock drafts and speculation is killing me.

Also, some people act as though the first round pick is the only one that matters. The Bills have 10 picks. Then there are undrafted guys that we'll bring in, where the Bills probably had more success in than first-rounders in recent history.

We'll cut some guys after the draft, probably do a couple of few things more in free agency, etc. It's not all about the first round pick, although that is important. Fact is that it's REALLY hard to predict, and if you are right, then you are lucky, really. Even last year, when we picked third, it was hard to tell: I thought Denver would take Dareus and the Bills would take Von Miller. The debate was focused around 2 guys generally, and I still picked the wrong one...although I did prefer Dareus, so I was happy.

[feldspar]

Which one as we had two? As don't you know our second 4th Rounders is good enough to play the arguably the most pivitol position on offense? Whereas our first 4th Rounders is only good enough to be a backup SS.

Once the draft is over, where you were picked no longer matters. Simplest concept in the world: it's all about how well a player performs. You have Hall of Fame players that went undrafted. Tom Brady in the 6th, etc...

Maybe we should replace Kyle Williams now because he was picked in the 5th...or Stevie Johnson because, after all, he was picked in the 7th round, so he must not be a good receiver. Freddie went undrafted, so he should be cut.

Hairston has potential. We saw him play very well for a rookie last year. The last thing you want to do is reach terribly for a player in the draft because of the position he plays. I don't think there is a LT worth taking at ten. After Matt Kalil, the value isn't there where we pick IMO...not at all.

If we drafted for position in the first round, we should pick a QB every single year I guess. Could have wound up with Blaine Gabbert as a result. Fitzy....7th round pick.

[thenry20]

George Wilson is a really good pro. And he plays the same position.

I don't understand the logic behind those mock drafts. Again, they're ignorant of the Bills' personnel.

I am also confused by Nix's presser when he said you don't necessarily take a player of need or someone who can start for you right away in the 1st round! This runs counter to how things were done when Polian ran things during our heyday.

[Philagape]

Saying "We need an X most therefore we have to draft an X first" is the Whitner Philosophy.



(or Maybin, or McCargo, but I chose Whitner to show how even if he's not an epic fail, the philosophy still is)

[acehole]

You are correct here but witner is no barron.



Saying "We need an X most therefore we have to draft an X first" is the Whitner Philosophy.



(or Maybin, or McCargo, but I chose Whitner to show how even if he's not an epic fail, the philosophy still is)

[YardRat]

I don't understand the logic behind those mock drafts. Again, they're ignorant of the Bills' personnel.

I am also confused by Nix's presser when he said you don't necessarily take a player of need or someone who can start for you right away in the 1st round! This runs counter to how things were done when Polian ran things during our heyday.

Yeah, if you don't get an instant starter in the first round, especially when picking in the top half of the draft, then you're doing something wrong.

[The Jokeman]

Once the draft is over, where you were picked no longer matters. Simplest concept in the world: it's all about how well a player performs. You have Hall of Fame players that went undrafted. Tom Brady in the 6th, etc...

Maybe we should replace Kyle Williams now because he was picked in the 5th...or Stevie Johnson because, after all, he was picked in the 7th round, so he must not be a good receiver. Freddie went undrafted, so he should be cut.

Hairston has potential. We saw him play very well for a rookie last year. The last thing you want to do is reach terribly for a player in the draft because of the position he plays. I don't think there is a LT worth taking at ten. After Matt Kalil, the value isn't there where we pick IMO...not at all.

If we drafted for position in the first round, we should pick a QB every single year I guess. Could have wound up with Blaine Gabbert as a result. Fitzy....7th round pick.
I know that but as posted in numerous posts I feel Reiff is far superior to Hairston when it comes to skills to excel at LT I think that's why I take him. My point is if you evaluate the two players side by side and you ask me who I want playing LT it's Reiff. Hairston played well for a rookie, in other words he showed some potential which can be a deadly word when it comes to evaluation. As in a perfect world I'd love for Hairston to be a dominate LT that will answer a question that's been long for a long term solution since Wil Wolford left for the Colts ages ago. Yet it hasn't been answer. Yes we had some solid guys since than like Jennings and Peters we still haven't found someone. Can Hairston be that guy? Maybe but everything you read and see from him screams RT. So again I'm not drafting solely for position but evaluating what we have vs what we could have.

[better days]

I know that but as posted in numerous posts I feel Reiff is far superior to Hairston when it comes to skills to excel at LT I think that's why I take him. My point is if you evaluate the two players side by side and you ask me who I want playing LT it's Reiff. Hairston played well for a rookie, in other words he showed some potential which can be a deadly word when it comes to evaluation. As in a perfect world I'd love for Hairston to be a dominate LT that will answer a question that's been long for a long term solution since Wil Wolford left for the Colts ages ago. Yet it hasn't been answer. Yes we had some solid guys since than like Jennings and Peters we still haven't found someone. Can Hairston be that guy? Maybe but everything you read and see from him screams RT. So again I'm not drafting solely for position but evaluating what we have vs what we could have.

Well, you have no idea what we could have by drafting Reiff at #10.

He COULD be a LT, or he COULD be only a RT & not as good a RT as Hairston. All indications are Reiff will play RT in the NFL.

[The Jokeman]

Well, you have no idea what we could have by drafting Reiff at #10.

He COULD be a LT, or he COULD be only a RT & not as good a RT as Hairston. All indications are Reiff will play RT in the NFL.
Do you even bother to review what your saying or do you just speak off the cuff?

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/draft-2011/players/54380.html#ixzz1sn5eS8q3


Positives: "Massive offensive line prospect who moves very well on his feet. Bends his knees, blocks with leverage and displays adequate footwork sliding off the edge in pass protection. Keeps his feet moving, works to stays square, and jolts defenders with violent hand punch. Anchors in pass protection, plays with quickness, and turns defenders off the ball as a run blocker."

Negatives: Bends at the waist and struggles to adjust. Not a dominant run blocker.

Analysis: "Hairston is a prospect who's watched his game take off the past two years and showed further progress as a senior. Likely a blocker who will be moved to the right side of the line, he must improve as a run blocker yet has the natural skills to succeed in the NFL."
Grade 2.55

by contrast

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/draft-2012/players/83180.html#ixzz1sn6B2ldM


Positives: Outstanding pass blocking left tackle with a solid game. Fundamentally sound, consistently blocks with leverage and quickly gets his hands into defenders. Displays good footwork in space, has solid blocking range and moves well on his feet. Quick out to the second level, stays square and keeps defenders in front of him. Keeps his head on a swivel and works well with teammates. Displays the ability to adjust to oncoming defenders, easily picks up stunts or twists and knocks opponents from the action with good hand punch.

Negatives: Lacks a dominant base and gets minimal movement run blocking. Marginally explosive at the point.

Analysis: Reiff has been very productive at Iowa the past three years and projects as a starting left tackle at the next level. He possesses good size with growth potential and has the ability to develop into a complete lineman.
Grade 3.20
Take some time to get intune what people are really saying about these guys instead of working off a sound bite and if I'm not mistaken the sound bite eludes that Reiff might have to play a year or two at RT and then be shifted to LT. Which isn't a bad thing as we did that a few years ago with a guy who's made a few Pro Bowls since by the name of Jason Peters.

[feldspar]

I know that but as posted in numerous posts I feel Reiff is far superior to Hairston when it comes to skills to excel at LT I think that's why I take him. My point is if you evaluate the two players side by side and you ask me who I want playing LT it's Reiff. Hairston played well for a rookie, in other words he showed some potential which can be a deadly word when it comes to evaluation. As in a perfect world I'd love for Hairston to be a dominate LT that will answer a question that's been long for a long term solution since Wil Wolford left for the Colts ages ago. Yet it hasn't been answer. Yes we had some solid guys since than like Jennings and Peters we still haven't found someone. Can Hairston be that guy? Maybe but everything you read and see from him screams RT. So again I'm not drafting solely for position but evaluating what we have vs what we could have.

Yeah, but you look for a superior athlete at his position when picking at #10. There are better players than Reiff at #10. In other words, you don't take Reiff just because you think he's an upgrade over Hairston. We could still upgrade over Hairston in the second round or some other way, perhaps. If Hairston is serviceable, you can go with him in the meantime until you are in a position to get a great player. Not every player on your football team is going to be great.

The Bills want to get TWO tackles in this draft somewhere...or maybe they'll pick up a free agent. They have no depth there, really.

Reiff is a big reach at #10. That's how we ended up with McCargo...we needed a DT, and he was the best one on our board. We actually traded up back into the first to do that. Big mistake.

[The Jokeman]

Yeah, but you look for a superior athlete at his position when picking at #10. There are better players than Reiff at #10. In other words, you don't take Reiff just because you think he's an upgrade over Hairston. We could still upgrade over Hairston in the second round or some other way, perhaps. If Hairston is serviceable, you can go with him in the meantime until you are in a position to get a great player. Not every player on your football team is going to be great.

The Bills want to get TWO tackles in this draft somewhere...or maybe they'll pick up a free agent. They have no depth there, really.

Reiff is a big reach at #10. That's how we ended up with McCargo...we needed a DT, and he was the best one on our board. We actually traded up back into the first to do that. Big mistake.
I don't see where he's this "big reach" Most draft evaluators rank him in the top 15 in terms of prospects. Yet because Mayock made a small comment about him being a RT all of a sudden a bunch of fans start to rethink about him being a guy worth our pick. Is Floyd a better prospect than Reiff? Maybe by the slimmest of margins but not significantly enough in my eyes that I take him over Reiff. Toss in Floyd's been screaming up the charts, Aaron Maybin or Erik Flowers anyone?

While I agree not every player on your team is great I'm of the belief if you can pass protect longer (see with better players) then your guys down the field don't have to be as great because coverage can only be good for so long before someone will break free. I mean Gailey's been able to make an undrafted RB arguably one of the best RBs last season before he got hurt. He's made a 7th Round WR a top 15 player at his position and a 7th Round QB a serviceable guy. He's also made an undrafted WR a pretty good #3. I don't think it's out of the realm to think he can make a 2nd or 3rd Rounder a #2 WR.

[feldspar]

I don't see where he's this "big reach" Most draft evaluators rank him in the top 15 in terms of prospects. Yet because Mayock made a small comment about him being a RT all of a sudden a bunch of fans start to rethink about him being a guy worth our pick. Is Floyd a better prospect than Reiff? Maybe by the slimmest of margins but not significantly enough in my eyes that I take him over Reiff. Toss in Floyd's been screaming up the charts, Aaron Maybin or Erik Flowers anyone?

We are talking about draftniks and mock drafts here. Here is something I read:

"Sources tell Sporting News' Russ Lande that NFL teams are not nearly as high on Iowa OT Riley Reiff as the media, and that Reiff could fall "toward the bottom of the first round" or even into the second."

http://rotoworld.com/player/nfl/7437/riley-reiff

Just because the media says something over and over, doesn't make it true. In fact, I believe a lot of these guys just copy each other. They hear something and repeat it, until you hear it so much that you think it's true. That's called propaganda.

Quarterbacks are over-valued because of the position they play, and so are Left Tackles quite a bit. I think that Reiff is overvalued because of the position he is projected to eventually play. Dunno if he could even play it this year. Reiff is hardly a lock...you may get him and STILL have to look for somebody better in the near future. Don't that for sure, of course.


While I agree not every player on your team is great I'm of the belief if you can pass protect longer (see with better players) then your guys down the field don't have to be as great because coverage can only be good for so long before someone will break free. I mean Gailey's been able to make an undrafted RB arguably one of the best RBs last season before he got hurt. He's made a 7th Round WR a top 15 player at his position and a 7th Round QB a serviceable guy. He's also made an undrafted WR a pretty good #3. I don't think it's out of the realm to think he can make a 2nd or 3rd Rounder a #2 WR.

So you think Gailey has some magical quality that makes his players better than they really are? No, Chan plays to his players' strengths. He's just smart that way. Freddie has always been good, but he had a breakout year in Chan's second year. Maybe Chan should have waved his magic wand the first year he was here. Stevie was never given much of a chance until Gailey arrived. Chan also puts Fitz in positions to succeed. Working with average-to-subpar QBs is one of the things Chan is most famous for.

Anyway, these are all so-called "skill" positions. You can have more success if you alter your scheme to fit their strengths, which is what Chan does well. But there is only so much you can do for an offensive lineman in that respect. Blocking is always blocking...defensive guys come at you the same ways all the time, and as a play caller, there is only so much you can do...you can try to get the ball out quicker or something, but the o-line coach is the biggest influence on those guys, not the head coach.

[The Jokeman]

We are talking about draftniks and mock drafts here. Here is something I read:

"Sources tell Sporting News' Russ Lande that NFL teams are not nearly as high on Iowa OT Riley Reiff as the media, and that Reiff could fall "toward the bottom of the first round" or even into the second."

http://rotoworld.com/player/nfl/7437/riley-reiff

and to finish the link you presented:

It would be a fall similar to Reiff's former Iowa teammate Bryan Bulaga, who was widely projected as a top-ten or even top-five pick before the Packers stole him at No. 23.

So maybe the predraft hype was warranted on Bulaga and maybe it is on Reiff. As to me the interpretation of stole means that Bulaga has proven to be better than his end draft position.
As again my main arguement is not for the sole drafting of Reiff but the pairing of Reiff with other players. Yardie posted a fair mock a little while ago that didn't have us taking Reiff so it's not like I'm not willing to look at other options. I just want to see names and of course ask questions later.

[feldspar]

and to finish the link you presented:

It would be a fall similar to Reiff's former Iowa teammate Bryan Bulaga, who was widely projected as a top-ten or even top-five pick before the Packers stole him at No. 23.

So maybe the predraft hype was warranted on Bulaga and maybe it is on Reiff. Also thanks for helping make my arguement that scheming can help skilled position players excel not solely talent.

Bulaga plays RIGHT Tackle in the NFL...we'll see if they move him to LT. And what happened to him has absolutely nothing to do with what may or may not happen with Reiff...NOTHING. They are two different people...two different players...in two different situations.

But it doesn't matter what you or I think. I'm no expert on drafting players. If the Bills think that Reiff can be a great LT, then I'd be all for the pick. I trust Buddy Nix to make the pick for the right reasons, is the point. It won't be based on public opinion or mock drafts. Nothing is guaranteed, either, as everybody knows.

I don't know who was claiming that scheming don't help skilled position players to succeed. That's just dumb. Talented players don't do well in some situations, as we've seen. But I think that Chan is famous for creating systems that fit his players, not having players fit his system...of course, it's not as black-and-white as that, but I feel Chan is creative working with what he has. Don't ask a guy to do what he can't do well, and focus on what he CAN do...as much as you can...

[The Jokeman]

Bulaga plays RIGHT Tackle in the NFL...we'll see if they move him to LT. And what happened to him has absolutely nothing to do with what may or may not happen with Reiff...NOTHING. They are two different people...two different players...in two different situations.

But it doesn't matter what you or I think. I'm no expert on drafting players. If the Bills think that Reiff can be a great LT, then I'd be all for the pick. I trust Buddy Nix to make the pick for the right reasons, is the point. It won't be based on public opinion or mock drafts. Nothing is guaranteed, either, as everybody knows.

I don't know who was claiming that scheming don't help skilled position players to succeed. That's just dumb. Talented players don't do well in some situations, as we've seen. But I think that Chan is famous for creating systems that fit his players, not having players fit his system...of course, it's not as black-and-white as that, but I feel Chan is creative working with what he has. Don't ask a guy to do what he can't do well, and focus on what he CAN do...as much as you can...
I get that and I guess I'm in the minority that believe most of the scouting reports that believe that Reiff can be a quality LT in this league and not been desuaded by a comment made by Mike Mayock.

Is Bulaga playing RT because he's a bad player or is there a better player in Chad Clifton playing LT in front of him? Tell me this why do WRs seemingly move from team to team every year in free agency and quality LTs don't? I found this page a few minutes ago and thought it made for an interesting read. I welcome everyone to read it.

http://cindrich.com/2010/the-blind-side-evolution-of-a-game/

[YardRat]

http://cindrich.com/2010/the-blind-side-evolution-of-a-game/

Nice, short read. Hated that poison pill clause, and in reality the Bills could have matched it without killing their salary structure, but didn't want to do it.

[feldspar]

I get that and I guess I'm in the minority that believe most of the scouting reports that believe that Reiff can be a quality LT in this league and not been desuaded by a comment made by Mike Mayock.

Is Bulaga playing RT because he's a bad player or is there a better player in Chad Clifton playing LT in front of him? Tell me this why do WRs seemingly move from team to team every year in free agency and quality LTs don't? I found this page a few minutes ago and thought it made for an interesting read. I welcome everyone to read it.

http://cindrich.com/2010/the-blind-side-evolution-of-a-game/

Nobody is arguing that Left Tackles aren't important.

The funniest part of the link you provided is the picture of "The Blind Side" movie...Micheal Oher plays Right Tackle now, so maybe they should make "The Blind Side, Part II: the Side in Plain Sight."

What are "scouting reports?" Why aren't these people GMs or REAL scouts that draft REAL players? It's a little more complicated and important when you are doing it for real.

Do you have any idea the amount of time that it takes to accurately evaluate every single player coming out in the draft? It's not an exact science, either. You have to project how smoothly his transition will be into the Pros as well. You have to weigh what you see with him as a player against all the other players, and not just the ones that play his same position. Then you have to know something about him as a person. How smart is he? Can he learn? What's his attitude and work ethic?

Then you have to have access to ALL the game film, as well as talk to the people surrounding this player if you can. You do not get the inside scoop unless you are totally involved in this whole process.

Most people do not know most of these things...myself included, granted. We all know how fast they can run the 40, how high they can jump, how much they can bench press, etc, but that's not football.