Something to ponder: how do you define "reach"?

[OpIv37]

The justification for the Whitner pick is that he's a playmaker and it's a position of need, so it doesn't matter where he was predicted to go. Marv wanted him and Marv got him- so what if it was 5-10 picks early?.

But Marv also wanted McCargo. According to that logic, why wait until our second round pick or worry about being able to trade back in? Why not just take him at #8? I mean, he's our guy, right? He fills a position of need, right? Who cares if the "experts" say he's late 1st-early 2nd round? We shouldn't take the chance that someone will take him in the 32 picks or so between our first and our second, right?

NO picked a S in the 2nd round (their 2nd pick), so obviously that was a need for them- why not just take Huff at 2? Who cares if the "experts" had him in the 5-10 range? They need a safety, right?

Either of those moves would have been universally criticized. But it uses the same logic as the Whitner pick.

[ICE74129]

Re: Something to ponder: how do you define "reach"?

Reach is a media term. It is a buz word to say 'I don't like who you took WHERE you took them in the draft because I didn't have them rated that high'.

[OpIv37]

Re: Something to ponder: how do you define "reach"?

Reach is a media term. It is a buz word to say 'I don't like who you took WHERE you took them in the draft because I didn't have them rated that high'.

so maybe it is- but the question remains: Is the draft about getting the guy you want regardless of the price, or finding the best combination of team needs and available talent for the pick? At what point does it become a bad idea to pick a guy too early?

Fans would be livid if we picked McCargo at 8. But he's our guy and he fills a hole- according to the Whitner logic, there's nothign wrong with that.

[mysticsoto]

Re: Something to ponder: how do you define "reach"?

so maybe it is- but the question remains: Is the draft about getting the guy you want regardless of the price, or finding the best combination of team needs and available talent for the pick? At what point does it become a bad idea to pick a guy too early?

Fans would be livid if we picked McCargo at 8. But he's our guy and he fills a hole- according to the Whitner logic, there's nothign wrong with that.

I would have to say that it is a compromise that you have to do between their perceived talent level and the need of the player...ultimately, the GM decides how to compromise this in the best way they see fit for their team.

[justasportsfan]

Re: Something to ponder: how do you define "reach"?

It depends where the coaches think we had a bigger need and where the player they want could be possibly taken. If Marv thought that no other team would take Whitner in the first rd. then maybe he could've waited.

Marv obviously knew that MCCargo would be there where they took him but since he knew the Giants wanted him, he traded up to get his guy.

[LifetimeBillsFan]

Re: Something to ponder: how do you define "reach"?

I would have to say that it is a compromise that you have to do between their perceived talent level and the need of the player...ultimately, the GM decides how to compromise this in the best way they see fit for their team.

Precisely!

I've been saying all along that the choice was Whitner/McCargo vs Bunkley?Bullocks or ???

The Texans chose Mario Williams over Reggie Bush not because Reggie wasn't as good or even a better player than Mario, but because, in addition to it being easier for them to come to a contract deal with Reggie, Williams actually filled a bigger need for them. So they passed on "the next Gayle Sayers" for "the next Julius Peppers" (old timers like me who have seen them both will argue that Sayers ranks higher on the all-time list of RBs than Peppers will rank on the all-time list of DEs). The Jets passed on Leinart and Cutler to take the offensive lineman that they felt would help their team more.

In the Bills' case, they perceived the hole in the middle of their defense as being a bigger need than their hole on the offensive line. They set out to address that need by getting the two best players they could at the two positions: DT and S, that they could. They ended up with the best SS and 2nd best overall DB in the draft and the 3rd best DT in the draft. If they picked Bunkley at # 8--which no one would have complained about--they would have ended up with the 2nd best DT and a safety that they felt was not as close in ability to the guy they got. If they traded down, they could have missed out on both and gotten stuck with players that they didn't want or with the DT that they got and a safety that they didn't want.

Now, you can argue that they should have taken a Bunkley and, if they didn't like the safeties on the board, an OT, possibly Justice. But, they obviously do not perceive the OT position as being as big a need as the DT and S positions. By going the route that the Bills decided to go, they were able to get two players who will play major roles and significant minutes in their defense this season. They did not believe that any O-lineman in this draft other than Ferguson would be ready to start this season. Would they have liked to get an offensive lineman out of the top of this draft? They said as much. But, they deemed that addressing the safety and DT positions with the best combination of players they could get was a higher priority and they had to make a compromise to accomplish that.

It's a judgement call. And, quite frankly, since they have just seen the players that they have to work with in the recent mini-camp and know what kind of players they feel that they need to be successful, I believe that they have a little bit better sense of what the team's biggest needs were and which players had the best potential to fill those needs that any of us here do. A person doesn't spend as much time working in that business as they have without knowing a little something.... And, usually, there's a reason why intelligent people do things the way that they do them--you don't get a masters degree from Harvard or graduate from Yale if you are not at least half-way intelligent....

After the way that this team has been handled for the last five years, a lot of Bills fans seem to think that everyone who walks into OBD suddenly becomes stupid. And, that the fans and media pundits are automatically smarter than anyone who works for the Bills possibly could be. Now, that may or may not be true, but why not wait to see what these players look like on the football field before assuming that Levy & Co. don't know what they are doing, are stupid or made a bad judgement call?

[ICE74129]

Re: Something to ponder: how do you define "reach"?

A reach to me is if you have a guy from say OU, FSU, Tenn, Penn St etc that has dominated at every level sitting there and he is a need (say DT) but then you draft someone from Midd Tenn State instead...that is a reach.

[LifetimeBillsFan]

Re: Something to ponder: how do you define "reach"?

A reach to me is if you have a guy from say OU, FSU, Tenn, Penn St etc that has dominated at every level sitting there and he is a need (say DT) but then you draft someone from Midd Tenn State instead...that is a reach.

Well, I guess that you would have passed on Joe Greene, then.... Terry Bradshaw, too.... Need I go on?

[bledslow]

Re: Something to ponder: how do you define "reach"?

bills got a STIFF.no other way of putting it. there was SO much better talent on the board at the time.maybe he proves everybody wrong(i can't see it).



bradshaw suks,he was fortunate enough to be on the best team in that era.he finished his career with 2 more td passes then int's. such an inconsistent qb. most overrated qb ever.

[Iehoshua]

Re: Something to ponder: how do you define "reach"?

bills got a STIFF.no other way of putting it. there was SO much better talent on the board at the time.maybe he proves everybody wrong(i can't see it).



bradshaw suks,he was fortunate enough to be on the best team in that era.he finished his career with 2 more td passes then int's. such an inconsistent qb. most overrated qb ever.

The only thing that "suks" here are your posts.