Mock Draft First Round (Pettigrew and Mack).

by csc06258 on Apr 20, 2009 5:58 PM EDT

Now that the Bills have two first round picks they have a lot more flexibility within the first round. In my opinion, I don't think there is anyone really worth picking at 11. If you think of previous years we knew the pick would be a CB last year, and at 12 the previous year believed Lynch was the way to go. This year isn't so obvious because of all our holes. The BIGGEST hole is now left tackle. I don't care what you tell me, we have NO left side of the line. Tackle needs to be addressed or left guard in the first. I propose we trade our 11 pick and move down somewhere before Atlanta. We take TE Pettigrew with this pick and pick up an additional 2nd or 3rd via the trade. Now we can address the O-line by taking Alex Mack. He can either play center or guard for us and start right away. If we pick a tackle at 11, he is no guarentee of being any good, and being able to start right away. Both Pettigrew and Mack would start right away. Now we have a ton of ammunition to move up if we want to (Very top of 2nd) and grab one of the many DE. Who know, Ayers might slip to the begining of the 2nd. There are so many DE's. They are not all going to be picked in the first round like everyone projects. I only put emphasis on O-Line and TE because we have absolutely No one that can play those positions really. Schobel and Kelsay are O.K starters who proved they can be satisfactory.

Just another great fan opinion shared on the pages of BuffaloRumblings.com.

Tweet Comment 17 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

So...

You identify the biggest hole as LT, and propose Buffalo doesn’t address it with any of their first three picks? I’m not sure I agree with that strategy. I’m not sure why a first round LT wouldn’t start and isn’t guaranteed of being good, but Pettigrew and Mack somehow are.

Granted, no one in the draft is “guaranteed” of being good, but the whole reason you pick players in the 1st as opposed to the 4th is because they have a better chance of being good, yes?

by Mark Parisi on Apr 20, 2009 6:39 PM EDT reply actions

I understand what CSC was saying

in that both Pettigrew & Mack are seniors and very NFL ready (every analyst agrees), whereas the LTs beyond the Jason Smith & Eugene Monroe there are no sure bets.

In my opinion, even though LT is a huge hole to fill for us, by drafting guys like Pettigrew & Mack we really solidify the Line and we provide walker or Bell the support he needs. Kugler is going to have to change his blocking schemes a bit and stop leaving the LT on an island to fend for himself and with a TE like Pettigrew he’ll be able to accomplish that. I could easily imagine a line comprised of
Pettigrew – Walker – Mack – Hangartner – Butler – Chambers/Bell

Your ability to control the LOS is directly linked to your ability to win football games!
FEED the BEAST!

by keysh67 on Apr 20, 2009 7:20 PM EDT up reply actions

In response

I said that LT and LG are the biggest needs. we have no left side of the line. How is Edwards going to get the ball to his guys if he doesn’t have time. At times last year he didn’t have time. These two picks would almost solidify the line. I haven’t heard an analysist say there is a standout LT that will be avaliable at 11. and if Smith is avaliable is there at 11 would you take him with all the character issues. He might turn out to be another Jason Peters. I think these two guys would be great for the O-Line. and Pettigrew and Mack are more guaranteed to be more NFL ready than any of the tackles. But your right, no one is a guarantee.

by csc06258 on Apr 20, 2009 7:35 PM EDT up reply actions

I just really wonder if we can get to the other teams quarterback. Our DE’s sucked last year and if no one is drafted on day one we are screwed

Fat, Drunk, & Stupid is No way to go through life.

by Deadpool71 on Apr 20, 2009 7:38 PM EDT up reply actions

What is the priority?

I wonder what hole needs to be filled first – DE, OLB, OG, or LT.

My ranking would be
1. DE
1a. – LT
2. OG
3. OLB
4. TE
That is how I would draft it if I had that power. Agree or Disagree?

Fat, Drunk, & Stupid is No way to go through life.

by Deadpool71 on Apr 20, 2009 7:31 PM EDT reply actions

Agree somewhat.

We only have so many picks, and I would rather solidify the front line. Our D-Line isn’t so bad, but our O-line is nothing right now. We lost our two best this offseason. I would rank it.

1.) OT
1a.) OG
2.) TE
3.) DE/OLB

by csc06258 on Apr 20, 2009 7:43 PM EDT up reply actions

Disagree. You don't put an order to the positions that you draft.

if you do that, then you limit the talent that you draft. What you should do is dress a list of need and then you draft the best available out of all those positions. You don’t ever set positions to draft, ever.

by CanadianBillsFan on Apr 20, 2009 7:44 PM EDT up reply actions

Right but..

this is a list of our biggest needs, not who I am saying we draft. your right, you take talent, but you have to consider our needs. For example, you dont take the top running back and best player in the draft if he falls to you at 11 when you have marshawn lynch.

by csc06258 on Apr 20, 2009 7:46 PM EDT up reply actions

Agreed. Thats why you dress a list of your needs and then you draft the best available player out of your needs position. You domt write a list saying that in the first you have to go OT and OG.

by CanadianBillsFan on Apr 20, 2009 8:09 PM EDT up reply actions

but not every need is born the same

and not every position is the same…

i’m all for ignoring LT till the 2nd or later…but for a different reason than you…not b/c I don’t think you don’t draft need…but i think taking an OL is a luxury that high on a team that desperately needs playmakers…taking an OL at 11 will dissapoint me unless it’s Smith

by tiimbitz4786 on Apr 20, 2009 10:38 PM EDT up reply actions

agree

by Bob on Apr 20, 2009 9:40 PM EDT up reply actions

I think we overstate the need at DE

we’d do well to add a situational pass rusher or two…but they don’t have to be first rounders…we just need athleticism…kelsey and schobel can at least play every down….they just can’t explode off the ball or make plays…so we have the luxury of getting a speed guy who isn’t an every down guy later

If we stay at 11 (which I hope we don’t) I’d take cushing…we need a studly LB

I do hope we trade up for one of the three elite LT’s or trade down and take cushing later tho

by tiimbitz4786 on Apr 20, 2009 10:40 PM EDT up reply actions