No_Matter_What

After reading this thread the problem I see is that we are too good. We need to start sucking again. That way we may draft in top 10, and we can draft top end RB talent in the beginning of the second round. And everybody will be happy!

I think we are drafting one of the following: Williams, Olave, Johnson, Lloyd, Booth or Gordon. So 5 there and 1 not. While Booth is more likely than anyone else, math still says yes to your question. So yes.

Thanks Virgil for processing my pick from my shortlist since I was on a high level meeting (i.e. sleeping). The world will never know but we were hoping that Boye Mafe falls to us. It didn't happen, so we chose Logan Hall as the next player on our board. We need help all over the Dline, and Hall offers lots of versatility. He lined almost everywhere in Houston. He was also getting a lot better each year in college and we hope that the trend continues in Browns uniform.

I just watched some of his film. I like him. While I certanly hope we can do better in the first round, he is acceptable as a consolation prize I still prefer Burks though.

Run on safeties! The Bears @mannc are on the clock.

Not that it matters much but this is not correct. 3 players. Pickens is chosen and you left him on the list.

Ok I partly agree, definitely some players will not be on our board. We can only make educated or less educated guesses which I agree that we as fans tend to agree put more value on positions of need. But I don't think that it got out of control here. We still pick other players at some point and really good ones make their way to this board. Anyway, for me part of the fun will be comparing it to real results. Looking at board we created here it is very realistic that Daxton Hill will be best available. Will we in fact choose him over some WRs available or someone like Davis/Lloyd/Linderbaum or other players who could be possibly falling? And stuff like this. I guess we will see.

Man it's probably a problem on my side but despite my effort I don't get what you are saying. You say that Bills (in reality) need max 10 guys on the board for the first round, right? And what happens if somehow all those 10 players are taken before we pick? Then we either reach for need (CB/WR as you say) or pick better prospect on other positions. I.e. whoever is next on our board. Which is what we are simulating here. And obviously, as we go on the board becomes relevant for 2nd round, not 1st. Which again is fine for me and I see no harm in it. EDIT: To be more specific. I assume that you are saying that Bills have on their board only e.g. WRs Williams, Wilson, Olave, Burks, CBs Stingley, Gardner, Booth, McDuffie, OG Johnson, S Hamilton, some top OTs including Penning, LB Lloyd and thats it. So what happens if they are all gone? We have to pick someone. Someone who is next on the board. I have no idea if it is Linderbaum or Jordan Davis if they somehow fall, or if it is Kyler Gordon or Jahan Dotson who they might consider 2nd round talents, but they have to pick someone who is next on their board. And goal of this thread was to simulate such board.

What does this have to do with Gunner's response? He reacted on you saying that NewEra's cost analysis was wrong. He gave you long and thoughtful response. And instead of explaining where NewEra and Gunner were wrong you changed the topic.

I am no expert, but two things. Objectively, he should be close to BPA right now (I am on another comp but he is around 17-20 at consensus big board), but he is clearly falling a lot in mocks. And there is the DE Bills thing. We invested 3 high picks and lot of money (Miller) into the position last 2 years. If Beane was to draft another DE high, such guy needs to be such a clear BPA that there is no doubt that we have to take him. And that is and never will be Karlaftis at 25 or even much lower. It is something like Ojabo at 57 or so. We will see. Thanks, and I agree. Voting sample size is small but tendencies are pretty clear imo. As for the board, Jahan Dotson was selected. Seems like yet another WR and CB are going to be next

Also added Quay Walker and George Pickens instead of Ebiketie and Cine. @T master

Not sure if I follow you Esp. bolded doesn't make any sense to me. Point (at least for the first round) is to have 25man board. That way you are prepared for any scenario that does not include trade. Right now we have 12 guys on the board + 10 considered locks in top 15 + maybe 2 QBs which will be taken ahead of us. Which means exactly opposite of what you are saying - guys on this list HAVE to be in play at 25. We need at least one more player to make sure that we have 25man board. And having this board was the whole point of this thread, so we haven't lost anything. Now I understand that your opinion is that unless at most top 10 guys from our list make it to our pick Bills need to trade down. That is fine and entirely possible. But if we don't trade down, we have to pick someone and thus we need board that includes 25 players (minus some QBs). Once we pick the next player or two we could stop this exercise since imo Beane isn't likely to trade down, but I am having fun with it so unless people stop voting I'll keep filling the board until actual draft.

He is already on the board, see OP. Means if we had a chance, we take him before all these players (what I understand you suggest).

Btw this vote is very close to the worst case scenario for the Bills if we stay put. He have chosen 12 players + 10 top ranked + maybe 2 QBs taken = 24 total, so if everything goes as bad as possible these are the choices we might face. Couple weeks ago it seemed realistic that Karlaftis or Wyatt might be gone and push some other players to us, but Wyatt might be off some boards due to off-field issues and Karlaftis seems to fall down the boards a lot. On the other hand, we can be sure that there will be some random picks ahead of us, there are always some - like Leatherwood, Davis, Ettiene or Turner last year. And there is still a chance that more than 2 QBs go before our pick.

What do you think about other three rushers? Is any of them really bad fit for the Bills?

I was strongly considering both of them. Problem with both is that they are a little lower on "consensus" board, and Pickens in addition is also 5th WR (and I wanted to avoid splitting of WR votes). But as I said I am ready to include them (or other preffered players) later today instead of some DE or S with zero votes. I'll let you know.

Good morning. I put Jordan Davis (19 votes) and Drake London (16 votes) on the board. Since we have already chosen 12 players, I thought it was time to add new. However, since you can have only 20 options in one poll question, I had to completely restart the poll with a new question. I also lowered number of required votes to 15. Players on poll are coming from consensus big board created by me (ESPN, PFF, Tankathon, PFN, Athletic) and include all best remaining slightly favored towards our needs plus adjusted based on discussions on these forums. If you think someone really important was omitted please let me know and I might replace him. Please also suggest who should be replaced. I think there are too much DEs for our taste but not sure who should I skip. Also, I don't think Wyatt has any chance to be on the Bills board due to off-field issues but I decided to let people decide if he is worth.

Ok I am going to leave voting open until 3am ET to see if somebody reaches those 20 votes. Unless they will be major changes in voting advocating otherwise, I will then put top players with 20 votes or close to it on the board and restart voting. I will create new poll where I add 11 new players and probably lower the threshold to 15 votes (since there will be many players to spread out votes). As explained in OP, I can't add new players to existing poll unfortunately.

So to sum it up, based on voting in this thread I don't think that in heads up voting London beats McDuffie (90%+ certainty) or Gordon (60%).

In general, I agree with you, there is always going to be some votes splitting in this kind of exercise. But I thought about it a lot and imo what we are doing here is the most objective way how to create the board (within some reasonable time). I really think that votes splitting factor is very limited. Williams, Wilson and Booth were clear choices. When Booth was selected, there were 7 votes for WRs (London 3+Olave 4) and 10 votes for other CBs (McD 8 + Elam 2). When McDuffie was selected with 20 votes, there were 26 CB votes (Elam 4, Gordon 2) and 23 WR votes (17 Olave, 3 London, 2 Watson, 1 Burks). So maybe in heads up Olave would beat McDuffie (in TSW vote), but otherwise it was not a matter of vote splitting - McDuffie and Olave were clearly above the rest. I think you are mostly underestimating how relatively lukewarm Bills fans on this board are towards London. If there was any major interest, he would've been chosen by now. London is 12th on consensus big board I just created for myself (ESPN, PFF, Tankathon, PFN) and Elam is 32nd (!). Elam has no business having same number of votes no matter how many more WRs are available. Same with Zion Johnson, who is 28th on consensus board. Most of people on this board think that you don't draft OG in the first, yet Johnson has as many votes as London and Burks combined. If London was viewed as top WR, he would've gone shortly after Williams, Wilson and Olave. They had no problem getting votes. Also, I think there are lot of people like @GunnerBill. He voted for Watson, but I don't think his mentality at this stage is "WR" - he is not choosing London if Watson wasn't available.

Well to be fair it's not easy to distinguish those New Jersey teams...

Kyler Gordon selected.

Good morning and happy Easter Monday everyone. We have added 3 players to the board yesterday, hopefully we will keep the pace today!

Done. Just curious - is there any chance that Linderbaum can (temporarily) play guard?

Ok so I cannot work around forum software as I intended. I copy paste what I just explained in OP. You can have only 20 options in one poll question. As the time went on I wanted to add players, so I had to add another question. However, in such case everyone was forced to pick a player in both questions, which was not what I intended and would skew the results. So I deleted second question. Anyway, I think that at least 3-4 next players would be in any case chosen from the original list. Therefore, I will keep the list as is for the 3-4 next players, and then I create complete new one (so voting will restart completely). Sorry for the confusion. @NewEra thanks for pointing that out. Keep on voting!