GunnerBill

It is in a sense but it doesn't dilute my opinions at all. Just means I am clearer than I would otherwise be that they are opinions. I probably do overuse "I think" for my own tastes. Except Campbell is the least comfortable of the 3 (I throw Simpson in there too) going sideline to sideline and our defense under Leslie asked both Edmunds and Milano to run lateral to the line of scrimmage a LOT. Take the point on Sanders and his blitzing. He obviously played as a pass rusher most of his life until last year so he is advanced in that area. I think you can fit any of them into our D. But none are plug and play versions of Tremaine. He was a bit of a unicorn.

It is explained here multiple times, but sure. The basics are: I watch college football during the season and keep a list of guys I see who make plays that impress. Then the first week of January I flesh out the list of guys to watch by position by comparing to some of the established draft nicks and by watching the all star games. But I don't do any grading up until that point. Once the list is fleshed out I work position by position down my list and I watch minimum 3 full games of every player I grade. Of I haven't seen at least 3 full games of you I don't grade you and you don't go on the board (I have cheated my own rule on that twice that I know of - with Kyle Dugger and small school IOL the Broncos took - I had to use the all start games as a 3rd exposure). My grading system is broadly reflective of all others: Elite grade - immediate high level playmaker and all pro candidate. First round grade - either 10 year starter at a premium position, or elite potential within 2 years at a non-premium position. Second round grade - potential to be a starter but some development needed at a premium position; or 10 year starter at a non-premium position; or (and these are rare but you do get them) elite potential but a complete project. Third round grade - rotational player at a premium position; or potential to be a starter but some development needed at a non-premium position. Fourth round grade - backup / developmental prospect at a premium position; or rotational player at a non-premium position. Firth round grade - special teamer who can provide limited cover at a premium spot; or backup / developmental prospect at a non-premium spot. Then I don't split 6th/7th and UDFAs. That is an entire category to me. Either a special teamer who gives cover at a non-premium position or someone I think is a practice squad player. The reason I don't split them is because in those rounds teams are generally not saying "who is the best guy?" But "who has the best chance of making our 53?" it becomes about the depth of existing roster as much as talent evaluation. On average I will grade between 125 and 150 players a year. I'd love to do more but it comes down to time and effort. It is a hobby not my job. There are always going to be guys who go as early as day 2 that I just haven't got around to. I also grade scheme agnostic which is not the same as the job individual teams are doing. There are times when I know a certain type of scheme will value a guy higher than another.

No. I expressed my opinions. I just made clear that is what they are.

I didn't love the Josh pick. That is a matter of record. But my overall track record stands up to scrutiny and is there for people to see. And yes. I only have two elite level grades in the draft. It is the weakest draft I have evaluated and this is year 10 doing it for me.

I say that a lot because multiple on here get very defensive if you don't put "I think" before expressing an opinion. I agree with you, it is unneccessary. My view is on a fan message board it should be perfectly apparent when what you are doing is expressing an opinion and that actually when people should be clear is when they are not expressing an opinion and are stating something as a matter of record. But the consensus on the board seems to be that you have to make clear your opinions are opinions. As for zero added value... that is your opinion. You are entitled to it.

I would bring Anderson in at the right price. I doubt they will though. He isn't exactly Mr process.

I think finding a rookie to play at the level Tremaine did in 2022 out of the box is going to be a challenge. I think it was comfortably his best season as a Bill. I think Campbell could be the closest as a rookie, but I think his calling card is going to have to be his consistency (which until 2022 was Tremaine's issue, he was inconsistent). Simpson and Sanders would probably have some growing pains in year 1. Simpson would be converting to a true MLB for the first time and Sanders has only played 1 year there in college. But I think both of them have the potential to make more splash plays than Tremaine did. None of the 3 are the prospect Edmunds was coming out mind you. He just never quite lived up to his full potential with the Bills.

I don't think he will go round 1 myself (I think he is more an early day 2 guy) but he certainly could. I nailed 28 out of the 32 1st rounders in my final mock last year. I won't get close to that this year because the drop offs in talent come much earlier and so you will get into the scheme specific fits much sooner. I can see teams taking very scheme specific guys in the early 20s.

A lot of people have him going in the first 15 picks or so and I don't think he goes that early. Second half of the first round somewhere. I would be fine if the Bills take him at #27. I have him graded similarly to Christian Watson who was the guy I wanted them to take last year for exactly the "bet on traits" reason.

The concerns on Johnston are not raw production. They are about his skill set. Hands, route running and not playing to his size.

They will not be the only team he has met with though. It just means we don't know who the others are.

I wouldn't move up. But if he is there at #27 I think he is worth the swing. You are getting one of 2 elite level talents in this draft when your other options might be mid to late day 2 level talents who are getting pushed up by a bad year. I still think he goes top 10 though.

Think PFF's simulator is the best but I don't love their draft board this year it differs a fair bit from mine!

I am gonna say this now on Johnston.... I have had enough conversations with enough people to really believe he is going to go later than a LOT of people think. I am increasingly of the view JSN will be the first receiver off the board.

I haven't watched the video but dismissing a guy's input totally because he is a fan of a rival feels rather foolish. Maybe he has something to contribute?

Not a complete one. There is no obligation to report this stuff. So there is lots of sits that try and keep track but it is unlikely you will get a full list. The Bills record I think is that this regime has never picked a guy in round 1 that they haven't met with.

He couldn't play LT at Tennessee. What makes you think he can in the NFL? He played at LT in 2021, they moved him back to the right side in 2022 and there is really no comparison on film. He is significantly better at RT. I think he could get you out of a game there if your LT goes down. Or if you have a weak bench and your LT misses 2 or 3 weeks, maybe he could just about hold it down. But he just doesn't have the functional strength or hip bend to play left tackle at a high level IMO. I think Bergeron at right tackle or guard is going to be a very good NFL player. I don't actually think the drop off between Wright and Bergeron is that steep. If you could guarantee me I am getting Bergeron at #59 there is zero chance I'd consider a tackle at #27. The worry is that the drop off after Harrison, Wright and Bergeron (who are my second tier tackles) is significant. So there could well be a run ahead of that.

Right Tackle only players are not "premium OT prospects" Dawkins would be 7th in AAV at the guard spot if they moved him now on his current contract.

He is the most pro ready for sure. He is good in zone. But he doesn't have those sudden movement skills when matched up.

To be clear I (can't speak for others) was not calling Campbell a thumper. I was replying to a specific post about what Bills fans lean towards in linebackers. But I would say, and indeed have said, I think Campbell tested a little better than he plays per his tape. I am not anti-Campbell. He is the highest floor of the top 3 linebackers. I think he might be the lowest ceiling though. If we ended up with any of Campbell, Simpson or Sanders I'd feel pretty good about the MLB spot in the medium term.

I wasn't saying Campbell is just a 90s thumper. I was just commenting on that particular post. I think Campbell is more of a downhill type than Edmunds or Sanders / Simpson. But he isn't Brandon Spikes. He can cover in zone. He can't shadow in 1v1 as well as the other guys.

From reading 5 years worth of comments on Edmunds that is what this board leans towards. A lot of people just want a physical hitter.

No. I mean the fans when I say "they" not the Bills.

Yep the reported meeting with Elam came out literally 48/72 hours before the draft. When that happens someone wanted it out there.

I think this was part in jest but it isn't without a grain of truth. They want a 90s downhill thumper.