GunnerBill

I have no idea what any of this means.

I'm willing to take calls for pick #20.

The East on paper is a good division, no doubt. But a year ago people were proclaiming the West a division of death. Let's wait until they play the games.

Yea he is my next guy up after Bijan and Gibbs. I have a 2nd/3rd borderline on him.

Corner and Tight End are the two spots where I think it genuinely, through rounds 1-3, has good depth. But that is like 6 or 7 tight ends... it is better than a normal top end tight end class but that is a low numbers position. I think it is slightly above average at Edge, and it has good round 3/4 type depth at IOL. But it is weak at tackle, weak at IDL, weak at linebacker, weaker than most recent drafts at receiver... and it is just generally lacking blue chippers. Because round 1 is weak you are going to have lost half your round 2 board by the end of round 1. And at least a third of your round 3 board by the end of round 2. And to your point yesterday..... while I have never had more than 32 'round' or 'tier' or 'cluster' 1 grades.... I have had more than 32 'round' or 'tier' or 'cluster' 2 grades multiple times. I do this year too (just). I have 34.

Yea likewise. Feels a bit like repeating the Saleh / LaFleur mistake.

To an extent, sure. But I think this class is different. I think it just legitimately isn't very good. That doesn't mean there won't be any good players from it, of course there will. They will be fewer than most other years.

Yea the stretch play is designed as a one cut north and south play. The original Alex Gibbs version had very little lateral to the line of scrimmage running. Shanny Jnr in San Fran (and before that in Atlanta as OC) has incorporated a lot more. It depends how well the OC they have brought from that system really understands the system. Mike McDaniel, he has it, he understands what makes it go and so he can tweak and wrinkle as he sees fit. The LaFleur brothers, less so. They are a bit more fit their players into the system as they learnt it and run that. You'd want an inside zone heavy system for Bijan to me. Similar to what Arthur Smith ran with the Titans actually. Lots of inside zone, some gap/power stuff in short yardage... almost the Derick Henry plan (but with more use as a receiver).

Beasley has been done since the middle of 2021. The numbers prove it. He hit the wall in the middle of that season and his production dropped off significantly. I'm not a Beasley hater, I appreciate what he did for the Bills and he was important in Allen's development, but they cut him because he couldn't produce at the level required any longer. Nor could he when he came back. Nor would he suddenly now. He is done.

In fairness to him he got Neal - Giants too although at the wrong spot.

I'm not super sure I love him as an outside zone runner and there is a LOT of outside zone in that Shanny scheme (that one presumes the Texans will run). I think he can do it, sure, but I think you'd want to run more inside zone, and more gap scheme for him. I don't want a lot of plays running Bijan lateral to the line of scrimmage. He could do it, but I think he is better when he sticks his foot in the ground and gets north and south. And if you are picking a back that high I think you need to make sure you are using him in the best possible way.

Don't like him. Big, fluctuating weight, clumsy technique, constantly unbalanced. Spolier alert... I wouldn't take him before day 3. I know he will go before then. Possibly late 1st, more likely 2nd round. But I wouldn't take him. He isn't my type of prospect at all. Trent Brown is the only one there I would say is a fair comparison in terms of technical rawness. He was drafted in the 7th round.

He was the 5th worst of 164 tracked mock drafters from the big outlets in 2022 and he is consistentky Albert Breer was the best last year, from Charlie Campbell in 2nd. Simms is in the bottom 10 or 15 most years.

In my system a 7.0 to 7.9 is a first roubd grade and equates to either: 10 year starter at a premium position, or elite potential within 2 years at a non-premium position. That is where from what I understand I most differ from what a lot of NFL teams do because I build positional value into my grading. What most NFL teams do is grade and then apply positional value when they build their board. But I am not building a team specific board, mine is a conventional big board, so I have to find another way of recognising it and so I build it into my grading scale.

We are all using versions of the same thing. The fact the NFL doesn't apply the "rounds" moniker to it is the only difference. I get some people find that unhelpful. Personally I find it quite useful shorthand for distinguishing between levels.

We will beat them twice.

Bills will sweep the Jets in 2023

The swap is in. Skoronski to the Pack.

Yea but 3 GMs lost their jobs in the process (if we accept Veach was really im charge before the 2017 draft, which he was) that is part of the point.

I'd love to take Hooker in the 4th. Don't think he lasts that long. The problem with bridge QBs is they have to be a bridge to somewhere. Carolina and Indy have built bridges that ended with their GMs being in "draft me a QB or you are fired" territory as this class emerges. Denver bridged their way right past Josh Allen and Lamar Jackson. I am only ever in favour of a bridge as part of a specific plan. The Tyrod paycut bridge the Bills built in 2017 should be the model for a bridge.

The flip to #13.... to get closer to Skoronski.... is definitely one to look out for if the Jets won't trade away a 1st altogether. Flip 13 for 15, and get one of the Jets #2s plus a conditional pick next year that starts a 3, becomes a 2 if they make the playoffs and a 1 if they make the Superbowl.

Again, in a discussion yesterday with @Chaos a similar point was made. attaching "rounds" to it can potentially be confusing for some people. Personally I think it makes it simpler but don't call them rounds if in your mind you equate a round with 32 picks. Call them tiers. Call them clusters. Call them groups. Whatever you want. I am definitely not the only one. I was listening to the podcast Rick Speilman has been doing this year on my morning commute he said he "rarely" had more than 18 true first round grades in his 10 plus years with the Vikings. It is the way NFL teams work. I designed my grading system after talking to someone who has been in draft rooms. When Brandon Beane says he would trade back if his first round is cleared out he means the guys in the first tier on his board. Teams grade and then brigade by round which is what I do. But you could easily call it something else.

Again get all this, but the reality is if you are a GM you don't get 3, 4, 5 years to wait on your perfefct QB and know you will be in a position to draft him. You might get lucky and land needing a QB when a good class hits. You might not. But at some point you gotta take your shot.

He gave the Bills the top LB

All this info is searchable on the board. 19 and 5 borderline in 2020. 11 and 5 borderline this year. I am normally between 18 and 21 true 1sts and then 4 to 6 borderline guys. As a rule. The most true 1sts I have given was 23 in 2017. That is the best first round I have evaluated in the time I have been doing it. 2017 and 2018 consecutive were really strong classes. That is possible, definitely it is. There are lots and lots of older prospects in this class who used the extra year of covid eligibility and as a result when you are consideeing ceilings you have to factor in that physically at 24 or 25 you are pretty much what you are.