Buffalo Bills Buffalo Bills 2020 Continued

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rowley Birkin

Registered User
Oct 31, 2004
10,694
3,848
He's probably getting stashed on IR for the year. Very low likelihood to make the team. No harm in adding him, though.

To be honest im just happy to know one of the Bills UDFA signings - & know its a guy who most people had getting drafted.

It also says a lot about what I think about the Bills draft. I'm not buying any hype - it's flat out disappointing on the whole in my opinion. The picks I'm most excited about are the two guys taken at the end who I don't know anything about...

Beane has earned my trust though so I'm hoping I'm wrong & these picks are looking much better this time next year.
 
Last edited:

SoFFacet

Registered User
Jan 4, 2010
2,436
188
Rochester, NY
To be honest im just happy to know one of the Bills UDFA signings - & know its a guy who most people had getting drafted.

It also says a lot about what I think about the Bills draft. I'm not buying any hype - it's flat out disappointing on the whole in my opinion. The picks I'm most excited about are the two guys taken at the end who I don't know anything about...

Beane has earned my trust though so I'm hoping I'm wrong & these picks are looking much better this time next year.

On my board our non-QB non-specialist players were 35 (Epenesa), 80 (Moss), 118 (Hodgins), 120 (G Davis). So imo we actually got good/fair value while addressing the only glaring 2020 need (RB2) and adding competition to a few spots I didn't even anticipate (QB2, K).

Obviously Beane's BPA and mine often differed, but it's not reasonable to expect him to draft my favorite every time, and he knows more than I, anyway, obviously.
 

Husko

Registered User
Jun 30, 2006
15,328
7,566
Greenwich, CT
I should know better than to argue with such closed mindedness... but I said it's arguable. Close. Watkins is a generically decent WR at this point in his career. KC made him take a pay cut. All last year the debate was "is JB a #1? Probably not but he'd be an ideal #2..." Well guess what. Now he is that ideal #2.



He's probably getting stashed on IR for the year. Very low likelihood to make the team. No harm in adding him, though.



Put him on Minny or Buffalo and Diggs on KC and you'd think different. In this kind of debate you have to try to isolate the player from scheme and situation, focus on tape and metrics, etc. The only WRs that I know for sure are better than Diggs are Thomas, Nuk, Julio, and Adams.
I think you’re severely misunderstand Hill, his role, and what he does to the game. He’s with the likes of Julio in a league of their own.
 

Rowley Birkin

Registered User
Oct 31, 2004
10,694
3,848
On my board our non-QB non-specialist players were 35 (Epenesa), 80 (Moss), 118 (Hodgins), 120 (G Davis). So imo we actually got good/fair value while addressing the only glaring 2020 need (RB2) and adding competition to a few spots I didn't even anticipate (QB2, K).

Obviously Beane's BPA and mine often differed, but it's not reasonable to expect him to draft my favorite every time, and he knows more than I, anyway, obviously.

Epenesa - Read above. I accept its solid value but I hate the pick. He's the polar opposite of what I'd hoped for.

Moss - as you said - filled the only clear 'need' on the team, he compliments Singletary & he was probably the best RB on the board at the time. I'd have liked getting Dobbins or even Gibson SO much more though.

Davis - I think this was my least favourite pick. I was steamed up about Kvon Wallace going the very pick before. He was my target for the nickel role where most others had Dugger. No idea if Beane was interested in him but he should have been. Another one where I can understand the logic - WR4 needs upgrading but I don't like the choice at this point.

Fromm - I understand the BPA logic but I really hate this pick the more I think about it. The guy is the polar opposite of Allen - so it's not like if Allen goes down he'd come in without the team missing a beat. The justification for this pick seems to be 'he's a good guy' 'he will be good in the room' etc. Barkley does that already.

Bass - Having considered it I hate this pick as well. The guy has a big leg & not much more. Hauschka is fine from shorter distances. I do agree he clearly struggles with big kicks. I think that's one reason they got Vedvik in - primarily as a punter but also potentially as an auxiliary kicker to take the long ones. If they really wanted a kicker then sign the highest rated one as a UDFA like the Colts did.

The last two picks I know nothing about - but am most optimistic about probably as a result.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TalkingProuder

CrazyPsycho

Elite Drafter
Sep 25, 2003
17,670
5,251
I see people saying the Fromm pick is bad because he and Allen arent alike at all

How did Kelly/Reich turn out?
 

is the answer jesus

Registered User
Mar 10, 2008
6,598
3,121
Tonawanda, NY
Epenesa - Read above. I accept its solid value but I hate the pick. He's the polar opposite of what I'd hoped for.

Moss - as you said - filled the only clear 'need' on the team, he compliments Singletary & he was probably the best RB on the board at the time. I'd have liked getting Dobbins or even Gibson SO much more though.

Davis - I think this was my least favourite pick. I was steamed up about Kvon Wallace going the very pick before. He was my target for the nickel role where most others had Dugger. No idea if Beane was interested in him but he should have been. Another one where I can understand the logic - WR4 needs upgrading but I don't like the choice at this point.

Fromm - I understand the BPA logic but I really hate this pick the more I think about it. The guy is the polar opposite of Allen - so it's not like if Allen goes down he'd come in without the team missing a beat. The justification for this pick seems to be 'he's a good guy' 'he will be good in the room' etc. Barkley does that already.

Bass - Having considered it I hate this pick as well. The guy has a big leg & not much more. Hauschka is fine from shorter distances. I do agree he clearly struggles with big kicks. I think that's one reason they got Vedvik in - primarily as a punter but also potentially as an auxiliary kicker to take the long ones. If they really wanted a kicker then sign the highest rated one as a UDFA like the Colts did.

The last two picks I know nothing about - but am most optimistic about probably as a result.
I didn't care for the Epenesa or Davis pick. I thought there were better options available at those spots. With that said Fromm was a good pickup. He doesn't have a big arm or the mobility Allen has, but he's great at reading defenses, getting through his progressions and putting the ball on the money. He may not be a sexy pick, but he's got the potential to be a very good backup QB and that has a lot of value. I have no problem spending a 5th on him especially with a meh backup in Barkley who only has one year left on his deal. A 6th for a kicker with a big leg when our kicker has struggled with long field goals? Again not much issue with it, competition is a good thing. I was a little pissed they didn't address the OL, but signing Adams as a UDFA helped alleviate some of that anger.
 

flashsabre

Registered User
Apr 5, 2003
3,962
3,462
Visit site
People would be pissed if we took Chase Young ...

People are angry based on a few videos they watched on YouTube on a few prospects and think they understand which players should be picked.

They have no real information on these players, never talked to anyone directly involved with these people. They don’t know any of the player’s mental makeups, personal history, demeanour, willingness to listen and get better, their on field and off field work ethics. That is what Beane and his scouts do. Beane has had really good drafts here and I am sure this one will be good too.

Everyone has their opinion, time will tell, but the people that actually do the work on researching these players seem to think the Bills did well, especially without a 1st round pick.
 

Rowley Birkin

Registered User
Oct 31, 2004
10,694
3,848
I didn't care for the Epenesa or Davis pick. I thought there were better options available at those spots. With that said Fromm was a good pickup. He doesn't have a big arm or the mobility Allen has, but he's great at reading defenses, getting through his progressions and putting the ball on the money. He may not be a sexy pick, but he's got the potential to be a very good backup QB and that has a lot of value. I have no problem spending a 5th on him especially with a meh backup in Barkley who only has one year left on his deal. A 6th for a kicker with a big leg when our kicker has struggled with long field goals? Again not much issue with it, competition is a good thing. I was a little pissed they didn't address the OL, but signing Adams as a UDFA helped alleviate some of that anger.

Fromm - as said I think the value is good, but even if he turns out good I don't see the fit. Drafting Jalen Hurts for example would have made more sense imo.

Bass - the value is not good. I like they added another kicker - but do what the Colts did & pick up a UDFA. Who knows, they might even have got Bass as a UDFA. I'd have liked drafting the punter Mann a lot more than a kicker. Bills kicking is not bottom of the barrel imo the punting is currently.
 

SoFFacet

Registered User
Jan 4, 2010
2,436
188
Rochester, NY
Fromm - as said I think the value is good, but even if he turns out good I don't see the fit. Drafting Jalen Hurts for example would have made more sense imo.

Bass - the value is not good. I like they added another kicker - but do what the Colts did & pick up a UDFA. Who knows, they might even have got Bass as a UDFA. I'd have liked drafting the punter Mann a lot more than a kicker. Bills kicking is not bottom of the barrel imo the punting is currently.

Well Hurts was drafted #53. From the sound of things QB2 is a position they only addressed because the value become impossible to ignore. if by "fit" you mean his overall style is different than Allen, I think the need for that is overblown by fans.
 

truthbluth

Registered User
Feb 2, 2011
7,383
6,669
I think the QB and K picks were a little frivolous, but overall they addressed areas of need.
 

Digable5

Buffalo Proton (Positively Charged)
Feb 23, 2004
5,125
1,039
West Seneca
Something that sticks out from Beane’s press conferences, if you haven’t watched or read about them, is that he wasn’t picking BPA. He was picking best player that has a chance of making the team. That’s a big difference.

He may have had a Safety higher on his board when he picked Fromm, for example, but didn’t think he could make the team over the guys we have.

While I do think that is something a GM needs to keep in mind, it does concern me a bit that he has pretty much determined most other positions “to be filled” in a sense. That doesn’t mean he won’t add more competition or that everyone’s job is safe at those spots, but I think S, LB, TE and OL definitely could use more competition no matter who was on the board.

One thing I’ve learned by following the draft for more than 25 years is that no GM’s board is 100% correct. When you don’t think a guy can make your roster, you could be passing up your next all pro.

On the other side of that coin, I was happy to hear him use the words “premium position”. This is a principle I agree with that I think is important in roster decisions like the draft. Even if a S might have been higher on their boards, QB is a premium position and is worth the investment if you think they have a good chance of making the team. Taking a chance on a QB you like is much better use of an asset than taking a 4th or 5th safety.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vcv
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad