Scouting Report Daiyan Henley ILB rounds 2-3

[oldmanfan]

1 hour ago, Beck Water said:

 

It would be very odd if the Bills drafted him in the 3rd with no plans to develop him as a starter on D.

 

Beane certainly sounded as though starting Bernard at MLB might be a consideration. 

 

And I repeat the question (to the multitudes, not just you) I asked above:

 

Different language is used in the scouting reports, but how is this guy Daiyan Henley different from Terrel Bernard, except for 2 3/4" longer arms and a 0.05s faster 40 time?

 

 

He’s not.  At least physically.

[Chaos]

4 hours ago, OldTimer1960 said:

Get ready for MLB to be a problem this season.  I agree that they could not responsibly pay Edmunds enough for him to stay, but man, options to replace him in FA and the draft are slim.  Many of the LBs in the draft are undersized for inside and the few with size (Campbell, Sanders, and Simpson) all have holes in their game somewhere and all would be at least modest reaches at the end of round 1, but will likely all be gone before Bills’ 2nd round pick.  

What are the holes in Campbell's game? 

[Simon Says]

5 hours ago, MasterStrategist said:

Great discussion/post.

 

There's a handful of these "undersized" LBs coming out this year, who are athletic but are they fits at MLB in our scheme?

 

To me, we just drafted a similar player (maybe not as talented) in Bernard LY.   

 

Big unknown what McDermott is looking to do at this position.  Personally, I'd be surprised if we draft this style of player.

What's so "great" about it? Milano, Bernard and Spector are similar types. If Bills draft LBs it should MLB or Edge...

[OldTimer1960]

3 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

I will be surprised if Bernard isn't the starter

I will be surprised if he does start at ILB, he is really small for that position.  Now, maybe he can start on the outside opposite Milano, but they have usually used only 2LBs.  Going to 3 LBs would take Tarim Johnson off the field more which is probably not preferable.

8 minutes ago, Chaos said:

What are the holes in Campbell's game? 

I don’t know that his lateral movement is ideal - in spite of his Combine performance.  I’m not saying he is bad, just that there will likely be better players available at 27 than him.  No doubt all players have some weaknesses.

[Chaos]

6 minutes ago, OldTimer1960 said:

I don’t know that his lateral movement is ideal - in spite of his Combine performance.  I’m not saying he is bad, just that there will likely be better players available at 27 than him.  No doubt all players have some weaknesses.

Have you seen any film showing a problem with lateral movement.  I feel like this is a myth. 

6 minutes ago, OldTimer1960 said:

Going to 3 LBs would take Tarim Johnson off the field more which is probably not preferable.

This is also why the probably signed Rapp today. MIght as well have  safeties playing, if their job is coverage. 

Edited March 27, 2023 by Chaos

[gonzo1105]

I actually believe Spector will eventually be the guy this year at Mike 

[OldTimer1960]

12 minutes ago, gonzo1105 said:

I actually believe Spector will eventually be the guy this year at Mike 

Welp, that would be really nice if he can do it well.

[MasterStrategist]

1 hour ago, Herb Nightly said:

What's so "great" about it? Milano, Bernard and Spector are similar types. If Bills draft LBs it should MLB or Edge...

It's a great discussion because it's an unknown how McDermott plans to adjust the defensive scheme this offseason.

 

We are highly likely moving away from Fraziers Tampa 2 scheme, that required a MLB with Edmunds traits. 

 

So it makes for interesting discussion/creative options to fill that MLB void 

[PrimeTime101]

5 hours ago, TheWeatherMan said:

So your opinion is truth? 😂

more then mine.. but yea  

4 hours ago, Beck Water said:

 

So....how does this guy differ from Terrel Bernard other than 2 3/4" more arm length and a 0.05 second faster 40-time?

If we're gonna draft an undersize linebacker in the 2 or 3rd round....didn't we do that last season?

 

https://www.nfl.com/prospects/terrel-bernard/32004245-5223-6424-136f-901f81674ee9

 

https://www.nfl.com/prospects/daiyan-henley/32004845-4e46-6212-4f0a-603906125b28

 

I got to admit I scratch my head a bit at one 6'1, 224 lb guy being described as an "Undersized sub-package nickel linebacker with special-teams value on the next level." while another 6'1", 225 lb guy gets described as "A rambunctious inside linebacker with good speed and toughness"

40 time and size ? yep same person. Reaction time... quickness.. viciousness? coverage? Different beast. IF you think the speed and size tangibles are the only thing that matter then Idk what to say man.  I never said i even necessary wanted this guy. I was just putting a scout report on a guy of position of need and fits around where we pick. 

[QLBillsFan]

9 hours ago, mannc said:

I just read that he’s from Washington State, not a “small school”.

What does the conference have to do with it ? Plenty of examples of great lbs have come from the PAC conference. USC for example. If you want to discuss his skills vs Bills system or needs that’s fine. But he’s certainly played very competitive football. 

[ndirish1978]

9 hours ago, mrags said:

That’s funny. That’s exactly why I’ve thought of just about every single LB in this draft not named Sewell or Campbell. 

Drew Sanders is 6'5 235, not a Milano-type. Sewell is more athletically limited than I would like. 

[mrags]

28 minutes ago, ndirish1978 said:

Drew Sanders is 6'5 235, not a Milano-type. Sewell is more athletically limited than I would like. 

When I hear things like “athletically limited” I automatically think if stout MLBs that don’t get pushed around in the run game, and LBs that attack the LOS to meet the runners before they already have a head of steam going. You know, the opposite of what Edmund’s was. And I’m 100% pleased about that. 
 

but I shouldn’t get my hopes up. Because MCD loves his small, undersized guts that are quick and agile. It’s shown apparently in our run defense the past few years. For those people that want that, don’t complain come playoff time when our DLine can’t hold up and get ran all over. 

[Beck Water]

5 hours ago, gonzo1105 said:

I actually believe Spector will eventually be the guy this year at Mike 

 

Please say more about this belief. Seriously - based on his scouting report, preseason, the 6 games where he saw snaps on ST (mostly early in the season), the 12 snaps he saw on D - whatcha got?

 

PS in case not clear - pure request for information and understanding

Edited March 28, 2023 by Beck Water

[BBFL]

5 hours ago, gonzo1105 said:

I actually believe Spector will eventually be the guy this year at Mike 

Don’t take this as an attack or chide toward your opinion as you’re entitled to it…

But what exactly makes you believe a guy that was a late 7th rounder who saw absolutely no playing time other than the blowout of Pittsburgh… (31-3 @ H/T) is “the guy” to get it done? Nothing remotely great on Special Teams either.

 

So that leaves Clemson playing time to really evaluate his talent and well it was mediocre at best. 
 

Please, if you could, enlighten those who are interested as to what lead you to the point you are at…

 

Thanks. 

6 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

Please say more about this belief. Seriously - based on his scouting report, preseason, the 6 games where he saw snaps on ST (mostly early in the season), the 12 snaps he saw on D - whatcha got?

Ditto. 

Edited March 28, 2023 by BBFL

[Beck Water]

5 hours ago, PrimeTime101 said:

more then mine.. but yea  

40 time and size ? yep same person. Reaction time... quickness.. viciousness? coverage? Different beast. IF you think the speed and size tangibles are the only thing that matter then Idk what to say man.  I never said i even necessary wanted this guy. I was just putting a scout report on a guy of position of need and fits around where we pick. 

 

I mean, I read his scouting report - I read Bernard's scouting report.  I never said that I thought speed and size are the only things that matter.

 

I asked how the two of them differ.  Your answer?

[John from Riverside]

7 hours ago, mrags said:

If there’s no reason to be down on him? Then there’s likely no reason to replace him. 

 

Pretty sure I do. He’s my number 1 LB I’d want on this team from the rookie class to replace Edmunds. He seems to be the anti-Edmunds which is why I like him so much. Please tell me why I don’t want him. 

My son is a huge fan of his college team lives about a half a mile away from the stadium
 

He really is the anti-Edmonds because he is slow as *****

[akcash]

this dude passed the eyeball test. sign me up.

[NewEra]

8 hours ago, Chaos said:

What are the holes in Campbell's game? 

Some may disagree, but these are the holes that I see. 

 

this is my assessment- Lacks explosiveness.  Lacks speed to run with RBs and many TEs.  Has major struggles getting off blocks.  
 

I like the player and would love

him in rd 2.  I think he’d be a solid yet unspectacular starter for several seasons, but will just be another Poz-  solid player but not good enough to pay.  Hopefully he’d be good enough to not be the reason we lose in the playoffs.  
 

I’d go with the upside of Simpson but he’s a bigger risk as a Mike.  Hopefully we don’t have to worry about taking either player @ 27 because Beane will have traded down.  

[gonzo1105]

15 hours ago, BBFL said:

Don’t take this as an attack or chide toward your opinion as you’re entitled to it…

But what exactly makes you believe a guy that was a late 7th rounder who saw absolutely no playing time other than the blowout of Pittsburgh… (31-3 @ H/T) is “the guy” to get it done? Nothing remotely great on Special Teams either.

 

So that leaves Clemson playing time to really evaluate his talent and well it was mediocre at best. 
 

Please, if you could, enlighten those who are interested as to what lead you to the point you are at…

 

Thanks. 

Ditto. 

 

I didn't say he was the guy to get it done. I said out of the 3 options, he would be the best one. If you listen to the McDermott presser he kind of made it seem like Bernard would stay behind Milano but get a shot but he seemed more hesitant than Beane. Spector, while not a superior athlete like Edmunds, tested at the combine fairly well for a guy who was considered unathletic in scouting reports. He seemed to be the most instinctive based both on college tape and in the preseason when he was out there(granted against backups). He was always around the football in the preseason, he knew his assignments, and made tackles when the opportunity arose. 

 

If they want to draft a guy I wouldn't be against it though I think its a bad class. I could see them starting Dodson and eventually moving to Spector as well but I think at the end of the year, pending a highly drafted guy, that Spector will be manning the middle for the Bills based on his body type, his athletic profile, his ability to process and know his assignments. Spector will never be a flashy player nor will he have the physique of Edmunds but he's a heady ball player that I think could surprise with some time. 

[PrimeTime101]

20 hours ago, Beck Water said:

 

I mean, I read his scouting report - I read Bernard's scouting report.  I never said that I thought speed and size are the only things that matter.

 

I asked how the two of them differ.  Your answer?

I thought I already did. Quickness. Reaction times to plays. Reading plays. Explosive Tackling. all better than Bernard in my opinion. Bernard for example horribly miss judges crossing routs... this dude? no.. lol