MLB Jack Campbell #53 in the top 100 of The Athletic... is this our guy???

[harmonkillebrew]

On 3/30/2023 at 1:44 AM, Chicken Boo said:

For what its worth, his combine numbers are similar to Paul Posluszny's.  

Hi size is nowhere near. Puz was barely 6'2" 235.  Campbell is huge - 6'5" 250.  His numbers were a pleasant surprise for his size. He had the highest athleticism ranking at the combine for LBs.

 

Still, he'll be there in the 2nd.

[Doc]

6 minutes ago, harmonkillebrew said:

Hi size is nowhere near. Puz was barely 6'2" 235.  Campbell is huge - 6'5" 250.  His numbers were a pleasant surprise for his size. He had the highest athleticism ranking at the combine for LBs.

 

Still, he'll be there in the 2nd.

 

With the Bills' 2nd round pick?  No chance.

[OldTimer1960]

5 minutes ago, harmonkillebrew said:

Hi size is nowhere near. Puz was barely 6'2" 235.  Campbell is huge - 6'5" 250.  His numbers were a pleasant surprise for his size. He had the highest athleticism ranking at the combine for LBs.

 

Still, he'll be there in the 2nd.

I don’t think he’ll be there late in round 2 where Bills pick.  Think they would need to trade up for him in round 2, but I think they would have to pass on prospects at more important positions if they took him in round 1.

[Billz4ever]

1 hour ago, MrEpsYtown said:

 

Wilson came out with some of the same issues with block shedding a bit. Wilson was the first pick of the third round in a loaded draft class as a smaller school guy. 

 

Cambell is bigger and slightly more athletic. Split the difference, he is probably a high second-round pick. Considering where the Bills are picking, they probably have to take him in the first. 

 

Yeah, the reality is this...highly unlikely Campbell will still be on the board at #59.  If we want him, we will either have to get him in the first, trade out of the first and gamble he'll still be there if we can get into the early second, or use #27 on another position and trade up in the second round.

[Saint Doug]

8 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Agreed and I like Campbell. It would need to be a generational type LB and Campbell doesn’t seem like he’s that type. It also seems like bad team building. Draft a guy in the first, let him walk, and then draft another guy in the 1st 4 years later? Most LBs are a product of the d line in front of them.

I think this depends on the player and the position. If it is a position that doesn’t have a steep learning curve and a rookie can easily be plugged in, then letting the vet walk is a good plan. If you are replacing a player that is cost prohibitive to sign, you draft his replacement. Due to cap reasons, we just can’t re-sign every player we draft. Players on rookie contracts are very attractive, especially for expensive positions. I don’t think many people on here would’ve been happy giving Edmunds the contract he received from the Bears. That would not be good team planning. 
 

[dje85]

13 minutes ago, harmonkillebrew said:

Hi size is nowhere near. Puz was barely 6'2" 235.  Campbell is huge - 6'5" 250.  His numbers were a pleasant surprise for his size. He had the highest athleticism ranking at the combine for LBs.

 

Still, he'll be there in the 2nd.

I don't think he makes it out of the top couple picks in the second round. Pittsburg has the first pick in the second round and a glaring need at lb. The rams have a glaring hole at lb among a ton of other positions, The Saints have a big need, and a the Vikings. That's off the top of my head. There may be a couple other teams. 

[MrEpsYtown]

19 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Agreed and I like Campbell. It would need to be a generational type LB and Campbell doesn’t seem like he’s that type. It also seems like bad team building. Draft a guy in the first, let him walk, and then draft another guy in the 1st 4 years later? Most LBs are a product of the d line in front of them.

 

I tend to agree. The only time this really makes sense is if you want to reset your cap allotment at the position. You draft a top guy you get a very cheap cap hit for 4 years with a 5th-year option. You figure if they were to draft Campbell, by 2026 Matt Milano is 32-33 and you can pay Campbell if you want at that point and try to find Milano's replacement. When they decided to keep Milano I think it sealed Edmunds' fate. 

 

The same idea applies at corner. When Elam is done with his rookie contract, White's contract is up. So you decide if you want to keep Elam and draft White's replacement and rinse and repeat. it is the best way to work the cap imo. You really can't pay both. 

 

I would agree, however, that it isn't the best use of first-round picks but is a great and efficient way to stay cap compliant with flexibility. 

[nosejob]

Bleacher Report ranking: No. 27  Pos. rank LB 1...and training with Luke should certainly give him a huge boost especially in regard to McD's defense.

 

I would take him at 27. I would then use a 2024 1st and 3rd to get a pick as high as possible in the 2nd to get Avila. Then at 59 hopefully Foskey is still there.

 

This team needs to build a young core. Campbell and Avila (who played 2021 at center and 22 at GD.) would be my top 2 picks.

[Einstein's Dog]

On 3/31/2023 at 7:11 PM, Yantha said:

Again, there are zero teams ahead of us in the first round with MLB as a top need.

 

I think you are taking someone's subjective thoughts on needs a little too much as gospel.  To me, as in the website below, NYG is a real threat.

 

On 4/1/2023 at 3:58 PM, Doc said:

 

McD won't trade down if he's identified the MLB he wants (again, the Bills should have the first pick of one) and with the Steelers sitting there at 32 and ostensibly look for a MLB.

 

What about the NY Giants?  From WalterFootball.com at #25:

 

New York Giants: Jack Campbell, LB, Iowa 

The Giants would love a receiver, but the top four wideouts in this class are off the board. They could target a linebacker, given how thin they are at the position.

Jack Campbell has the size and athleticism to be a three-down player in the NFL.

[Doc]

1 minute ago, Einstein's Dog said:

What about the NY Giants?  From WalterFootball.com at #25:

 

New York Giants: Jack Campbell, LB, Iowa 

The Giants would love a receiver, but the top four wideouts in this class are off the board. They could target a linebacker, given how thin they are at the position.

Jack Campbell has the size and athleticism to be a three-down player in the NFL.

 

Anything is possible.

[whorlnut]

10 hours ago, MrEpsYtown said:

 

I tend to agree. The only time this really makes sense is if you want to reset your cap allotment at the position. You draft a top guy you get a very cheap cap hit for 4 years with a 5th-year option. You figure if they were to draft Campbell, by 2026 Matt Milano is 32-33 and you can pay Campbell if you want at that point and try to find Milano's replacement. When they decided to keep Milano I think it sealed Edmunds' fate. 

 

The same idea applies at corner. When Elam is done with his rookie contract, White's contract is up. So you decide if you want to keep Elam and draft White's replacement and rinse and repeat. it is the best way to work the cap imo. You really can't pay both. 

 

I would agree, however, that it isn't the best use of first-round picks but is a great and efficient way to stay cap compliant with flexibility. 

Same can be said at WR1. If you draft a guy in the first this year, by the time Diggs is done, we can pay the new receiver. 

[MrEpsYtown]

I mentioned somewhere, maybe in this thread that a couple of weeks ahead of the draft we would start seeing Campbell mocked in the first round. It seems to be happening. The perception that he is a second round pick is just perception. Suddenly he’s a 1 now. 

[Yantha]

25 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said:

I think you are taking someone's subjective thoughts on needs a little too much as gospel.  To me, as in the website below, NYG is a real threat.

 

Yes.  If I wish hard enough, NOBODY selects linebacker.  EVER...... 

[Simon Says]

On 3/30/2023 at 12:50 AM, Mark Vader said:

Agreed.

 

Trading down in general to get more picks would be a good move for the Bills this year.

 

I'd rather have more picks than signing a ton of UDFA's.

Trading down is risky if you still want Campbell. 

[Mark Vader]

6 minutes ago, Herb Nightly said:

Trading down is risky if you still want Campbell. 

That's how it goes.

[starrymessenger]

11 hours ago, harmonkillebrew said:

Hi size is nowhere near. Puz was barely 6'2" 235.  Campbell is huge - 6'5" 250.  His numbers were a pleasant surprise for his size. He had the highest athleticism ranking at the combine for LBs.

 

Still, he'll be there in the 2nd.

His RAS was higher than Tremaine Edmunds, who was pretty athletic.

Edited April 11, 2023 by starrymessenger

[Bookie Man]

Drew Sanders   12 GAMES    103 TT / 13.5 TFL / 9.5 SACKS / 3 FF 

Jack Campbell  13 GAMES    125 TT / 5.5 TFL / 1 SACK / 1 FF

 

After watching as much game film of both of these 2 I can find, there's no way you could pick Campbell over Sanders. Sanders does not come without flaws, but he is a far better prospect than Campbell. DS has loads more potential than Campbell. This was his 1st season at MLB. He's far more versatile. He is an actual threat off the edge, racking up 9.5 sacks. For all of those who clamored for Edmunds to get plays at DE, Sanders actually has proven he can do it. As a blitzer, he fights through blocks, sometimes double teams and gets to the QB. Campbell blizting actually reminds me of Tremaine. He gets stood up by smaller RBs or easily picked up by an O lineman. Sanders is an explosive player, his play actually reminds of Milano.  

 

I heard all the buzz about Campbell and was excited to check out all of his footage. I have to say, I don't see it with this guy. Before I thought I wouldn't mind the pick if it was in the 2nd. But now I don't think I'd like that either. I wouldn't touch the guy. I'm not clamoring for Sanders or anything. But if LB is going to be the first pick, it would be a HUGE mistake to take Campbell over DS (or take him period). jmho. 

Edited April 11, 2023 by ßookie_tech

[Sierra Foothills]

13 hours ago, KOKBILLS said:

In fact, statistically Campbell's a better overall athlete than Tremaine Edmunds...Campbell is literally the 7th best RAS athlete since the stats have been compiled. Right behind Luke Keuchly. And that includes all edge LB's...

 

1 hour ago, starrymessenger said:

His RAS was higher than Tremaine Edmunds, who was pretty athletic.

 

And then you watch Campbell's game video and you see the disconnect between his measurables and his play. He doesn't play as big, fast, or quick as he measures IMO.

[MrEpsYtown]

8 minutes ago, Sierra Foothills said:

 

 

And then you watch Campbell's game video and you see the disconnect between his measurables and his play. He doesn't play as big, fast, or quick as he measures IMO.

 

Definitely some truth there. He’s the anti Tremaine. For Campbell the game is moving slow for him, which is a good thing. There is no wasted movement in his technique and he makes a ton of plays. Tremaine looked really fast and athletic running to nowhere like a chicken with no head. I am really interested to see how things go down and what order these three top guys go in Campbell, Sanders, Simpson plus Henley as maybe the fourth. It really is an interesting race between three completely different guys for that top spot. 

Edited April 11, 2023 by MrEpsYtown

[gobills404]

2 hours ago, ßookie_tech said:

After watching as much game film of both of these 2 I can find, there's no way you could pick Campbell over Sanders. Sanders does not come without flaws, but he is a far better prospect than Campbell. DS has loads more potential than Campbell. This was his 1st season at MLB. He's far more versatile. He is an actual threat off the edge, racking up 9.5 sacks. For all of those who clamored for Edmunds to get plays at DE, Sanders actually has proven he can do it. As a blitzer, he fights through blocks, sometimes double teams and gets to the QB. Campbell blizting actually reminds me of Tremaine. He gets stood up by smaller RBs or easily picked up by an O lineman. Sanders is an explosive player, his play actually reminds of Milano.  

 

I heard all the buzz about Campbell and was excited to check out all of his footage. I have to say, I don't see it with this guy. Before I thought I wouldn't mind the pick if it was in the 2nd. But now I don't think I'd like that either. I wouldn't touch the guy. I'm not clamoring for Sanders or anything. But if LB is going to be the first pick, it would be a HUGE mistake to take Campbell over DS (or take him period). jmho. 

So all I got from this is Sanders is much better at blitzing (which nobody disagrees with) and would be a better DE in a hypothetical scenario that will never happen. That’s fine because Campbell is better actually being a MLB.

 

“It would be a HUGE mistake to take him period” did Jack Campbell screw your wife or something?? Dude is a very smart and experienced player, won the Butkus award, is an elite athlete just like Sanders while being 15lbs heavier, and has elite intangibles. Talk about effing insane hyperbole.

Edited April 11, 2023 by gobills404