We Addressed The Needs......

[bigbub2352]

I have heard alot of criticism about the Bills picks, but i am a fan of them. they addressed all needs in the draft DL, DB, OL, and LB. What else were we looking to pick, i mean we did sign like 11-12 players in FA and have essembled a team with alot of potential, maybe the Bills Reached but they got the players in the positions they needed U could possibly come out of this draft with 2 starting safties, a starting corner, 2 starting DT on rotation basis, and maybe a couple of depth players to develop into starters on the O line. Plus picking up Nance is the same as drafting say Maurice Stovall in the 3rd round. So I am pretty happy with this potential, we all no everyteam no matter how many experts say and how much scouting you do The Draft is still hit or miss ala Ryan Leaf, Mike Williams etc... Any thoughts..

[justasportsfan]

Re: We Addressed The Needs......

Thye are just pieces to the puzzle. Marv is in his first year of a rebuild . At least he has a plan and sticking to it. These players aren't gonna take us to the sb but IMo it's a great start to a plan in place.

[Pride]

Re: We Addressed The Needs......

Again, the problem isnt with WHO we selected... it was WHERE we selected them!

If we traded down in the first to pick up an extra 2nd, and didnt trade up from our 2nd to take one in the 1st... noone would say anything about it!

The problem is that we reached on our first two picks... neither were worthy of going where they did. Good players, sure, but we are paying #8 money to a guy we could have gotten at #24

[Dr. Lecter]

Re: We Addressed The Needs......

The Bills would not have gotten Whitner at 24.

The Dolphins, Ravens and Lions were all interested.

[OpIv37]

Re: We Addressed The Needs......

1. Regardless of whether or not we filled needs, was the draft managed well? Could we have filled those needs without losing that 3rd round pick?
2. Did this address the most important needs (particularly leaving the OL to the 5th round)?
3. Some needs were addressed- were they addressed sufficiently?


I guess the answers to those questions depends on whose analysis you believe, but that's where the criticism is coming from.

Someone posted one report that said McCargo plays basically the same position as Tripplett so they won't be on the field at the same time, and it also said that McCargo is weak against the run. Someone else posted another report that said McCargo is an explosive player that's strong against the run and the only reason he wasn't ranked higher was because he was overshadowed by the other guys on his line.

Obviously, if you believe the first one, the trade up was stupid and the draft was poorly managed. If you believe the second one, we filled a hole with McCargo- we paid a price for it but you get what you pay for.

I didn't watch any NC State games, so I don't know which one to believe (and watching highlight reels doesn't help- they're HIGHLIGHTS, not a representative sample).

[Jan Reimers]

Re: We Addressed The Needs......

I think a key to what Levy and Jauron are thinking lies in who we DIDN'T pick. They are apparently satisfied with the O line, where we simply drafted some depth. I think the signings of Reyes and Fowler, plus the development of Peters and Preston, will give us a much better line this year.

The brain trust also seems to be happy with our skill positions, TE, WR, RB and, most interestingly, QB. I think when the dust settles, JP will be given the opportunity to play and develop into a first rate QB.

[justasportsfan]

Re: We Addressed The Needs......

Again, the problem isnt with WHO we selected... it was WHERE we selected them!

If we traded down in the first to pick up an extra 2nd, and didnt trade up from our 2nd to take one in the 1st... noone would say anything about it!

The problem is that we reached on our first two picks... neither were worthy of going where they did. Good players, sure, but we are paying #8 money to a guy we could have gotten at #24

I don't care we got them as long as they make a difference on the field. Mike Williams ? Value pciks hasn't worked for us the last few years because there was no system. Grabbing value players who aren't right for this system aren't going to amount to anything.

[HHURRICANE]

Re: We Addressed The Needs......

Again, the problem isnt with WHO we selected... it was WHERE we selected them!

If we traded down in the first to pick up an extra 2nd, and didnt trade up from our 2nd to take one in the 1st... noone would say anything about it!

The problem is that we reached on our first two picks... neither were worthy of going where they did. Good players, sure, but we are paying #8 money to a guy we could have gotten at #24

Everyone, please read this post over and over again. This is the point, yes we addressed our needs, it was the way we did it that is the problem.

Best post on the whole Draft subject. PERIOD!

[OpIv37]

Re: We Addressed The Needs......

The brain trust also seems to be happy with our skill positions, TE, WR, RB and, most interestingly, QB. I think when the dust settles, JP will be given the opportunity to play and develop into a first rate QB.

I don't know if they're happy with QB as much as they're treating as an unknown. With the crappy OL and bad coaching last year, we really don't know what we have in JP. It's better to spend the picks on obvious positions of need like DT.

As far as the other positions- we added Royal and should have Everett back at TE, have a ton of fast WR's (although I could see this position being a problem), added A-train as Willis's backup at RB- so those positions should be fine.

[justasportsfan]

Re: We Addressed The Needs......

Everyone, please read this post over and over again. This is the point, yes we addressed our needs, it was the way we did it that is the problem.

Best post on the whole Draft subject. PERIOD!

Best post in your opinion.

"IF" these guys win ball games for us, it won't matter where we drafted them , would it? If they turn out to contribute like Freeney does for the colts ,will you still be calling them reaches? Like I said, refer to Mike Williams.

[HHURRICANE]

Re: We Addressed The Needs......

I don't care we got them as long as they make a difference on the field. Mike Williams ? Value pciks hasn't worked for us the last few years because there was no system. Grabbing value players who aren't right for this system aren't going to amount to anything.

Why don't you care?! You should care. We gave up a pick to get 2 players ahead of their draft spots. Take Bunkley, who's better than McCargo, take Griffin with your next pick, and keep your third pick. Where is the value pick?! In addition we got Youboty and Simpson as steals.

That makes no sense to say it doesn't matter. It does.

[justasportsfan]

Re: We Addressed The Needs......

Why don't you care?! You should care. We gave up a pick to get 2 players ahead of their draft spots. Take Bunkley, who's better than McCargo, take Griffin with your next pick, and keep your third pick. Where is the value pick?! In addition we got Youboty and Simpson as steals.

That makes no sense to say it doesn't matter. It does.

All I care about is winning, not where a draft was taken. Again, Mike WIlliams. Great value....NOT!

You draft to win, not for value!!!!!

[HHURRICANE]

Re: We Addressed The Needs......

Best post in your opinion.

"IF" these guys win ball games for us, it won't matter where we drafted them , would it? If they turn out to contribute like Freeney does for the colts ,will you still be calling them reaches? Like I said, refer to Mike Williams.

Unless you tell me that Whitner and McCargo, plus giving up a pick, is better than Bunkley and Griffin and keeping your pick, than again, you are making no sense.

[HHURRICANE]

Re: We Addressed The Needs......

Unless you tell me that Whitner and McCargo, plus giving up a pick, is better than Bunkley and Griffin and keeping your pick, than again, you are making no sense.

Justasportsfan, the above is a question. Are the Bills better taking Whitner and Mccargo and giving up a pick vs. taking Bunkley and Griffin and keeping their pick?

It's not a trick question, I am just looking for your opinion.

[justasportsfan]

Re: We Addressed The Needs......

Unless you tell me that Whitner and McCargo, plus giving up a pick, is better than Bunkley and Griffin and keeping your pick, than again, you are making no sense.

I'm not saying anything until I see the product perform on the field, but until you tell me that you're more qualified than MArv and Dick, you make no sense either.


Grabbing value picks doesn't automatically mean they are going to be a cohessive UNIT. The Pats won the sb with abunch of rookies for crying out loud. I know, I know Dick isn't BB but that's not the point.