Jump to content


Photo

Draft question: which do you take?


  • Please log in to reply
58 replies to this topic

#41 Luxy312

Luxy312

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,075 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 01:53 PM

From the Buff News today, and the analysis of Rex's defensive failure:

 

 

Given that, if the Bills are on the clock and both Mike Williams and the best safety in the draft are available, which do you take?

 

This is, of course, assuming that we don't add a starting WR or S in free agency, which I don't see happening.

 

 

Adams or Hooker before Williams for sure.  I would take either in a heartbeat.



#42 Kelly the Dog

Kelly the Dog

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,025 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 01:59 PM

You can take the second or third ranked qb who is down in the rankings and have it make a dramatic impact on your team and franchise. You can take the top rated corner, OT, safety and LBer who are at the top of the board and have them make a negligible impact on your team. 

 

An example of the above point is that when Kallil Mack was drafted by the Raiders he was ranked at the top of the draft board and was drafted near the top of the draft. Derek Carr was rated as a lower first to a high second round caliber player in that draft. Mack is an all-pro player yet he does not come close to having the impact that Carr has on his team.

 

The point is obvious. Certain positions have an importance that go beyond the ranking of talent. If a team has its franchise qb  locked in already on the roster then it makes sense to give more weight to the BPA approach to drafting. On the other hand if a team doesn't already have a legitimate franchise qb on its roster the imperative is to secure that position and make it a priority above everything else. Make no mistake that I am not suggesting reaching to find a qb from the draft as this franchise stupidly did with the EJ selection in that poor qb draft year. But there is no excuse to be passive in addressing a position that has more to do with success or failure than any other position. 

Good points. There is no team anywhere, any time, that automatically takes BPA. Otherwise you could just set your draft in a set order like a predraft fantasy football program and not even attend or watch the draft and just do it by computer.



#43 metzelaars_lives

metzelaars_lives

    Veteran

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,470 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 02:18 PM

It's "whom" when you're talking about people, not "which."

#44 ndirish1978

ndirish1978

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,386 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 02:25 PM

Is Reuben Foster still on the board? If so, I'm taking him. If not, I go Mike Williams and look at S in round 2.

 

I would second the first part. Reuben Foster is a beast and makes everyone around him better. If he's not there I take Hooker or Peppers, there are a lot of good WRs



#45 BuffaloHokie13

BuffaloHokie13

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,834 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 02:33 PM

Adams (S - LSU) > Foster (LB - Bama) > Hooker (S - OSU) > Lattimore (CB - OSU) > Davis (WR - Western Michigan) > White (CB - LSU) > Williams (WR - Clemson)

 

imo



#46 ndirish1978

ndirish1978

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,386 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 02:43 PM

It's "whom" when you're talking about people, not "which."

 

Also, this. Which would be if you were referring to a position group



#47 BigBuff423

BigBuff423

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,457 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 02:48 PM

From the Buff News today, and the analysis of Rex's defensive failure:

 

 

Given that, if the Bills are on the clock and both Mike Williams and the best safety in the draft are available, which do you take?

 

This is, of course, assuming that we don't add a starting WR or S in free agency, which I don't see happening.

 

 

The truth is, the Bills most likely need at least 2 Safeties given Graham probably goes and even if AW does return, as we saw this year injuries are just too much a factor for him to count on him this year. So, preferably the Bills get a good 2 WRs in FA, one possession type and one of the faster variety to take the place of Glass Goodwin and then Draft a S and WR as well. However, LB is a position  of need also - again depending on Z. Brown and how McD feels about him and the group. Either way, LB depth if nothing else, should get some attention. To me, Safety, WR, D-Line, LB and an extra Corner are things that need to be tended to via FA and Draft. If Taylor goes, QB jumps to the top of that list - and the salary is probably a wash since even if QB becomes the target in the Draft, you still need at least one good / decent Vet, i.e. Foles, Glennon, Landry Jones showed well a little this season, etc.


Edited by BigBuff423, 17 January 2017 - 02:51 PM.


#48 GG

GG

    Exit 151

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 27,215 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 02:56 PM

That never happens no matter what anyone says. They may come to the decision that the bpa is the best choice and pull the trigger on that bpa. But there is no such thing as automatic bpa. Every choice in every round in every draft in every sport by every team is exactly the same thought process. They look at the bpa on their board, they look at the areas of need, they look at the next best player at the positions of need, they look at guys that may be available at the position of the bpa in the next round or so and then take all of that info and more (like runs on positions and who they have already drafted or their depth at that position) and then and only then do they decide if they will take bpa.

 

Also, don't discount how much expiring contracts have in that BPA decision.  This is the part that most people ignore when discussing the GM position.  It's not just that the GM has control of the 53 and the coach has the 45.  The GM always needs to have a 2-3 year outlook on the roster, while the coach is only looking at it on a week by week basis.



#49 jeremy2020

jeremy2020

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,064 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 02:59 PM

I take the front seat.



#50 Kelly the Dog

Kelly the Dog

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,025 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 03:04 PM

 

Also, don't discount how much expiring contracts have in that BPA decision.  This is the part that most people ignore when discussing the GM position.  It's not just that the GM has control of the 53 and the coach has the 45.  The GM always needs to have a 2-3 year outlook on the roster, while the coach is only looking at it on a week by week basis.

Yep. I would guess there are 20+ factors in every single decision on whether or not BPA is the best choice. All of the ones I indicated, what you just did, a few other obvious ones, plus ones we probably didn't know about.



#51 JohnC

JohnC

    UDFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,147 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 03:26 PM

 

Also, this. Which would be if you were referring to a position group

You are punctilious.  :thumbsup:



#52 #34fan

#34fan

    "All Men Betray."

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,812 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 07:55 PM

LEADERS MAKE PLAYS!

 

Safety Nate Gerry, Nebraska.... Best in the draft.



#53 Kirby Jackson

Kirby Jackson

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,255 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 08:16 PM

I think for me I'd like Adams or Hooker or Williams or Davis. I think that all 4 of them have huge ceilings and play positions of need. I feel like you plug them in and play them from day 1. All of these guys can be Pro Bowl caliber players. I probably lean WR because I like the safety depth better than the WR depth in this draft.

#54 BarleyNY

BarleyNY

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,702 posts

Posted 18 January 2017 - 07:13 AM

---------------------
BarleyNY, on 15 Jan 2017 - 8:51 PM, said:
Adams (or Hooker) if he's there. If not, then Williams. I don't touch Peppers.
---------------------
This*

I'd put Hooker after Williams, but any of the three would be great. I don't think any of them make it to 10 though. Maybe Hooker.

Edited by BarleyNY, 18 January 2017 - 07:13 AM.


#55 Webster Guy

Webster Guy

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,495 posts

Posted 18 January 2017 - 08:59 AM

You can take the second or third ranked qb who is down in the rankings and have it make a dramatic impact on your team and franchise. You can take the top rated corner, OT, safety and LBer who are at the top of the board and have them make a negligible impact on your team. 
 
An example of the above point is that when Kallil Mack was drafted by the Raiders he was ranked at the top of the draft board and was drafted near the top of the draft. Derek Carr was rated as a lower first to a high second round caliber player in that draft. Mack is an all-pro player yet he does not come close to having the impact that Carr has on his team.
 
The point is obvious. Certain positions have an importance that go beyond the ranking of talent. If a team has its franchise qb  locked in already on the roster then it makes sense to give more weight to the BPA approach to drafting. On the other hand if a team doesn't already have a legitimate franchise qb on its roster the imperative is to secure that position and make it a priority above everything else. Make no mistake that I am not suggesting reaching to find a qb from the draft as this franchise stupidly did with the EJ selection in that poor qb draft year. But there is no excuse to be passive in addressing a position that has more to do with success or failure than any other position. 


Good post. I disagree with the EJ thing being stupid at the time, because they saw some big upside to a hard working, intelligent leader. A McNair type of guy maybe. I'll never blame a GM reaching a bit for a qb when they don't have one.

Its funny how a lot of posters think there some sort of definitive way to judge who is the best player available. There isn't such a thing. Is the best kicker in the draft better than the best punter available? Yes if you're the Bills, but no if you're the Ravens or Packers.

You can't feed uncertain variables into an equation and get certain answers. The draft is a ton of guesswork and luck, with gut instincts and last minute coin flips everywhere.

The only certainty is nobody gets the trophy without a stud qb. Keep drafting them until you hit a homer....

#56 bisonbrigade

bisonbrigade

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,356 posts

Posted 18 January 2017 - 09:07 AM

I would trade back and get as many picks as possible, not just this year but every year. Not just because of the Bills depth, but because injuries impact every team. So I would look to pick up at least two extra picks.



#57 HoF Watkins

HoF Watkins

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,128 posts

Posted 19 February 2017 - 07:06 PM

I'm not real excited about taking a Safety with the first pick, but  want to note that when watching Jamal Adams I thought of Daryl Talley. He plays with intensity, and total involvement.

 

Malik Hooker also looks great, but then one of the first video's that show up is "Malik Hooker Almost Quit Football".

 

Kind of an odd contrast.


Edited by HoF Watkins, 19 February 2017 - 07:07 PM.


#58 C.Biscuit97

C.Biscuit97

    Ladies' Man

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,487 posts

Posted 19 February 2017 - 07:12 PM

Has a successful team ever spent 2 top 10 picks on a WRs? It seems highly doubtful and a waste of resources. Good qbs make WRs.

And it's hilarious that S is considered a position that can be drafted in the top 10 now. The Bills were ahead of the curve when they picked Whitner. They just picked the wrong player.

I love Mike Williams but it is an insane use of top 10 picks on 2 WRs. Go S.

#59 mead107

mead107

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,693 posts

Posted 09 April 2017 - 12:09 AM

Let's do it