Bills Draft Strategy vs the Consensus

[GunnerBill]

Just now, machine gun kelly said:

Why isn’t Benford in the 2022 draft as he’s a star?  Just because he’s a late rounder doesn’t mean he’s meaningless.  

 

I think @FireChans explained. He was looking at early picks vs consensus. Day 3 consensus is basically meaningless.

[FireChans]

46 minutes ago, machine gun kelly said:

Why isn’t Benford in the 2022 draft as he’s a star?  Just because he’s a late rounder doesn’t mean he’s meaningless.  

Do you know how much work it is to get to Benford's pick and cross-reference it with the consensus list and what players were and were not available to pick?

 

It was painful enough doing rounds 1-3 where I had a vague idea where everyone went.

[machine gun kelly]

Chans, I know you’re a decent guy, but the point is not everything happens in the first three rounds.  I wasn’t trying to bang on you at all.  Milano a fifth round pick, Dane is serviceable a late rounder doesn’t pick, Benford a Sixth round pick.  He finds gems.  Not everything is the for. Three rounds.  
 

I appreciate you doing the homework of that helps.

[JakeFrommStateFarm]

23 hours ago, FireChans said:

I'm not sure how much of you fine folks consume NFL media, but there was a very funny story last year about how Howie Roseman and the Eagles just follow the consensus draft boards, which makes their drafting look great to the people that make those draft boards.

 

Now who knows if that's really true (it's probably not).

 

But I think it would be fun to analyze the past Bills drafts based on consensus boards and see who we "should" have taken vs who we did (I'm only doing the first 3 rounds because its exhausting)

 

So let's begin

 

2024:

#33: Coleman - Big Board (BB):Cooper DeJean DB

#60: Bishop - BB: Ennis Rakestraw JR DB

#95: Carter- BB: Troy Franklin WR

 

2023:

#25: Kincaid - BB: Nolan Smith Jr, EDGE

#59: OCT- BB: OCT!

#91: Dorian Williams - BB: Antonio Johnson, DB

 

2022:

#23: Elam - BB: Jermaine Johnson, EDGE

#63: Cook - BB: Nakobe Dean, ILB

#89: Bernard - BB: Perrion Winfrey, DL

 

2021:

#30: Rousseau - BB: JOK, ILB

#61: Boogie Basham - BB: Creed Humphrey, IOL

#93: Spencer Brown - BB: Ifeatu Melifonwu, CB

 

What does this tell us?

 

I don't know tbh. I like both lists about the same. Sorry to waste your time but discuss!

 

 

Wow Bills passed on DeJean for Turtle Coleman ?

 

What a huge miss.  The int in the Superbowl broke Mahomes. 

 

He was a shell of himself after that pick

 

That was the flood gates opening !

Edited Friday at 08:14 PM by JakeFrommStateFarm

[BuffaloMatt]

If ifs and buts were candy and nuts.  . . . . . enjoy

[Doc Brown]

5 hours ago, Brand J said:

I’m not a fan of burning premium picks to trade up. It’s not where you select a player, it’s who you select. Watt went at the end of the first round, Chris Jones was in the 2nd, Hendrickson was a 3rd rounder, etc.

 

Trading up guarantees nothing and if it’s a miss, you just compounded the problem by giving up the chance to draft another difference maker. We’ve gotta get the pick right. Beane has had his chances at additional blue chip players.

I may be in the minority but I kind of liked the trade up for Allen.

[Brand J]

3 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

I may be in the minority but I kind of liked the trade up for Allen.

How about the trade up for Elam? Kincaid? Knox? Edmunds? Cody Ford? In general I support trading up for a QB you believe in, without a franchise QB you can’t compete for championships in the NFL. But trading up for other positions that may or may not work out? No thanks. Just because you sacrifice multiple picks for a player doesn’t make that player the right guy. 

[Doc Brown]

1 hour ago, Brand J said:

How about the trade up for Elam? Kincaid? Knox? Edmunds? Cody Ford? In general I support trading up for a QB you believe in, without a franchise QB you can’t compete for championships in the NFL. But trading up for other positions that may or may not work out? No thanks. Just because you sacrifice multiple picks for a player doesn’t make that player the right guy. 

Poor sarcasm on my part.  

[Thurman#1]

13 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

I may be in the minority but I kind of liked the trade up for Allen.

 

 

Heh heh.  Yup.

 

The rule (backed up by research from such as the two seminal articles from Massey and Thaler, Bill Barnwell's here https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/40052203/should-teams-trade-nfl-draft-lessons-deals-2024-class-winners-losers, the Harvard Sports Collective and on and on and on, with nobody doing the statistical research disagreeing, is that you massively reduce your chances of draft success if you use big draft capital to make big trade-ups.

 

With the caveat being that great QBs are so important that that's the one exception. Great QBs are available outside the top ten or so. But much much less often, so much so that trading up in an attempt to get a great QB is worth doing.

 

 

13 hours ago, JakeFrommStateFarm said:

Wow Bills passed on DeJean for Turtle Coleman ?

 

What a huge miss.  The int in the Superbowl broke Mahomes. 

 

He was a shell of himself after that pick

 

That was the flood gates opening !

 

 

May be a huge miss. Or not. Too early to be sure.

 

DeJean really was pretty good this year. How good would he have been if their D hadn't been so good at rushing the passer? How good will Coleman be when healthy because before the injury the first half or so of the season he was looking pretty damn good for his draft position.

 

Hard to know in both cases.

[Thurman#1]

20 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

I'm not ready to say absolutely yet, but I don't disagree. 

 

It's interesting to have this discussion with White having just signed. I think Benford could be another White, and by that I mean a star corner in this system but not a top three corner. I say that because at least the way the free agent market has defined the top three, it's always shut-down corners.  I never thought White, good as he was, was a top-three shut-down corner, and I don't think Benford will be, either.  What I've said for a quite a while is that the way McDermott wants to play the game, a shut-down corner doesn't matter to him as much as an all-round guy who is very good at man, zone, tackling, run support, and the team concept. So, while I love Benford and think he's just what the Bills want, I doubt the market ever will recognize him as top-three.  (Actually, with his extension, the market may never have an opportunity to recognize him in his prime.)

 

 

I'm not sure about what a shutdown corner is, really.

 

Does it mean only preventing completions at a high rate? Many INTs? Getting guys to throw elsewhere? Only in man coverage? Low passer ratings when thrown against? I honestly don't know anymore.

 

So I'm not sure if Benford is one, but I think it's not really a hot take to list him as a top five CB these days.

 

Here's one quick bit of support:

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/bills/news/buffalo-bills-christian-benford-pff-all-pro-team-first-quarter

 

"His early season excellence has been recognized by Pro Football Focus, with the outlet naming him to their first-quarter All-Pro team.

'Benford's 83.0 coverage grade ranks fourth at the position, but he has prevented separation on 75.68% of his opportunities in 2024— the highest rate in the NFL,' PFF writer Gordon McGuinness wrote. Benford has been outstanding this season, allowing a position-best 14.6 passer rating when targeted. His PFF defensive grade of 79.9 and coverage grade rank fourth among corners with a minimum of 100 snaps. He's also ranked No. 1 among all corners with a tackle grade of 85.4. (Interestingly, Elam has the highest overall grade of all corners, but he's only played on 23 snaps)."

 

This came early in the season, but we've seen generally agreement in several places as the season went on. 

 

https://www.syracuse.com/buffalo-bills/2025/03/buffalo-bills-agree-to-four-year-extension-with-top-cornerback-christian-benford.html

 

Apparently he got one first team all-pro vote last year and, "Although Benford lacks gaudy interception stats, he locked down the opposition last season allowing just 0.51 yards per coverage snap allowed. This was good for first among all cornerbacks."

 

But yeah, he appeared to give up his chances of top three recognition -- by the market -- by signing a year early and getting immediate security for himself and his family in exchange. I would value the market's opinion a lot, but it's not the only one I value.

 

Anyway, good talking to you, Shaw. Hope all's well.

[DJB]

Bills in the bottom 3rd since 2020.

 

[Shaw66]

3 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

I'm not sure about what a shutdown corner is, really.

 

Does it mean only preventing completions at a high rate? Many INTs? Getting guys to throw elsewhere? Only in man coverage? Low passer ratings when thrown against? I honestly don't know anymore.

 

So I'm not sure if Benford is one, but I think it's not really a hot take to list him as a top five CB these days.

 

Here's one quick bit of support:

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/bills/news/buffalo-bills-christian-benford-pff-all-pro-team-first-quarter

 

"His early season excellence has been recognized by Pro Football Focus, with the outlet naming him to their first-quarter All-Pro team.

'Benford's 83.0 coverage grade ranks fourth at the position, but he has prevented separation on 75.68% of his opportunities in 2024— the highest rate in the NFL,' PFF writer Gordon McGuinness wrote. Benford has been outstanding this season, allowing a position-best 14.6 passer rating when targeted. His PFF defensive grade of 79.9 and coverage grade rank fourth among corners with a minimum of 100 snaps. He's also ranked No. 1 among all corners with a tackle grade of 85.4. (Interestingly, Elam has the highest overall grade of all corners, but he's only played on 23 snaps)."

 

This came early in the season, but we've seen generally agreement in several places as the season went on. 

 

https://www.syracuse.com/buffalo-bills/2025/03/buffalo-bills-agree-to-four-year-extension-with-top-cornerback-christian-benford.html

 

Apparently he got one first team all-pro vote last year and, "Although Benford lacks gaudy interception stats, he locked down the opposition last season allowing just 0.51 yards per coverage snap allowed. This was good for first among all cornerbacks."

 

But yeah, he appeared to give up his chances of top three recognition -- by the market -- by signing a year early and getting immediate security for himself and his family in exchange. I would value the market's opinion a lot, but it's not the only one I value.

 

Anyway, good talking to you, Shaw. Hope all's well.

Thanks for finding that.  Good stuff in there.  

 

As for what is a shutdown corner, I think that fans and the media put a lot of emphasis on the Sauce Gardner types who have extraordinary quickness and have shown an ability to stick closely to even the fastest receivers on their cuts and changes of direction. They are remarkable athletes, but they are most useful only in defenses that play a lot of man-to-man and that want to force offenses to play only in a portion of the field by taking away the number one receiver. Belichick's Patriots played that way. That's why Belichick wanted Stefon Gilmore

 

 McDermott has been a leader in playing a more team-oriented defensive approach that requires the cornerbacks to be much more versatile. There have been very few cornerbacks good at both. Tre White is about as good as we've seen in terms of show those shutdown characteristics and playing in a team-oriented defense. Great shut down skills are somewhat wasted in a team-oriented defense, because the defense plays more zone and help schemes, and therefore the shutdown corners skills are wasted.

 

Bills fans can argue about the approach. Sometimes I think that McDermott's ideal defensive lineup would have 11 guys all weighing between 200 and 260 pounds with good speed and serious competitiveness. It's as though he would like to play with 11 fast small linebackers. The wisdom in how McDermott wants to play is that the more specialized your players get - like having a shutdown corner or a monster one tech tackle -  the easier it is for the offense to scheme away from that guy's special skills and toward that guy's weaknesses. McDermott wants 11 players on the field who have no serious weaknesses, and in order to do that, for most players that means avoiding guys with special skills.

Edited Saturday at 02:04 PM by Shaw66

[Logic]

On 4/17/2025 at 2:03 PM, Shaw66 said:

 

 

That's why I'm a fan of the Bills trading up this year.  Package the first, a second, and some other picks to get up into the teens and go after a guy with the potential to be a real difference make. If the Bills got lucky and landed a guy like a Watt, a Bosa, a Parsons, or a Chris Jones, this defense would be real trouble for several seasons. 

This is where I've been at for a few seasons now.

I understand why people are risk averse. I understand that, to some people, blowing up half a draft to get ONE guy seems foolhardy. 

But I look and see a team that has had "depth and balance" for years now, and when the playoffs hit, they invariably get beat by teams who have a star at least one position other than QB. The Chiefs with Kelce and then Chris Jones. The Bengals with Ja'Marr Chase. We don't have -- and haven't had -- that second guy. 

I think last season proved something to me. It was supposed to be the "necessary reset, purge the veterans, take your cap medicine" year, and the Bills were supposed to regress. But they DIDN'T regress! They came as close to the Super Bowl as they ever have under Beane and Allen. That told me that as long as Josh Allen is quarterback and as long as they have the culture in place that they do, they'll always be contenders. To me, that means that they can take some swings on stars now. It's okay. Blowing up half a draft to land a blue chip talent won't destroy them this year or for years to come.

So yes. I'm all for trading up and trying to hit a home run. I'm fine throwing caution to the wind a little bit and trusting the program these guys have built and GOING FOR IT a bit more. Whether it's a star edge or corner or receiver or whatever. If you think he can finally be that SECOND GUY that we have lacked, go get him. It'll be fine. Enough risk aversion.
 

Edited Saturday at 02:02 PM by Logic

[Shaw66]

4 minutes ago, Logic said:

This is where I've been at for a few seasons now.

I understand why people are risk averse. I understand that, to some people, blowing up half a draft to get ONE guy seems foolhardy. 

But I look and see a team that has had "depth and balance" for years now, and when the playoffs hit, they invariably get beat by teams who have a star at least one position other than QB. The Chiefs with Kelce and then Chris Jones. The Bengals with Ja'Marr Chase. We don't have -- and haven't had -- that second guy. 

I think last season proved something to me. It was supposed to be the "necessary reset, purge the veterans, take your cap medicine" year, and the Bills were supposed to regress. But they DIDN'T regress! They came as close to the Super Bowl as they ever have under Beane and Allen. That told me that as long as Josh Allen is quarterback and as long as they have the culture in place that they do, they'll always be contenders. To me, that means that they can take some swings on stars now. It's okay. Blowing up half a draft to land a blue chip talent won't destroy them this year or for years to come.

So yes. I'm all for trading up and trying to hit a home run. I'm fine throwing caution to the wind a little bit and trusting the program these guys have built and GOING FOR IT a bit more. Whether it's a star edge or corner or receiver or whatever. If you think he can finally be that SECOND GUY that we have lacked, go get him. It'll be fine. Enough risk aversion.
 

Exactly! What you say about last season is exactly how I see it: A reset year in which the general wisdom of McDermott's approach was demonstrated by the success he had with a bunch of players we all were worried about. 

 

This year they can afford to give up pics, of which they have plenty, because they have a solid team whose effectiveness was demonstrated last season. Now they need to add a difference Maker. I don't think the difference Maker is on offense. What they need is a stud, lineman or linebacker and I hope they trade up to get one.

 

 

[DJB]

We have enough singles and doubles on the roster. We desperately need a home run or at least a triple to help this team out. 
 

Outside of Josh who is a game breaking player that needs to be planned for by opposing teams?

[GunnerBill]

7 minutes ago, Logic said:

This is where I've been at for a few seasons now.

I understand why people are risk averse. I understand that, to some people, blowing up half a draft to get ONE guy seems foolhardy. 

But I look and see a team that has had "depth and balance" for years now, and when the playoffs hit, they invariably get beat by teams who have a star at least one position other than QB. The Chiefs with Kelce and then Chris Jones. The Bengals with Ja'Marr Chase. We don't have -- and haven't had -- that second guy. 

I think last season proved something to me. It was supposed to be the "necessary reset, purge the veterans, take your cap medicine" year, and the Bills were supposed to regress. But they DIDN'T regress! They came as close to the Super Bowl as they ever have under Beane and Allen. That told me that as long as Josh Allen is quarterback and as long as they have the culture in place that they do, they'll always be contenders. To me, that means that they can take some swings on stars now. It's okay. Blowing up half a draft to land a blue chip talent won't destroy them this year or for years to come.

So yes. I'm all for trading up and trying to hit a home run. I'm fine throwing caution to the wind a little bit and trusting the program these guys have built and GOING FOR IT a bit more. Whether it's a star edge or corner or receiver or whatever. If you think he can finally be that SECOND GUY that we have lacked, go get him. It'll be fine. Enough risk aversion.
 

 

I have been pro trade ups the last two years. Wanted to go up for Addison in 2023 and BTJ last year. I'm a bit more circumspect this year. I just don't feel like this is the draft for it. If a Matthew Golden slides a bit, with his combination of speed and route running, or one of the more explosive edge guys then maybe. I think those are the skillsets harder to find later in the draft. Otherwise I think this is more a let it come to you in round 1 draft. Round 2 is where I might get more aggressive.

[DrMaxPower]

5 hours ago, Logic said:

This is where I've been at for a few seasons now.

I understand why people are risk averse. I understand that, to some people, blowing up half a draft to get ONE guy seems foolhardy. 

But I look and see a team that has had "depth and balance" for years now, and when the playoffs hit, they invariably get beat by teams who have a star at least one position other than QB. The Chiefs with Kelce and then Chris Jones. The Bengals with Ja'Marr Chase. We don't have -- and haven't had -- that second guy. 

I think last season proved something to me. It was supposed to be the "necessary reset, purge the veterans, take your cap medicine" year, and the Bills were supposed to regress. But they DIDN'T regress! They came as close to the Super Bowl as they ever have under Beane and Allen. That told me that as long as Josh Allen is quarterback and as long as they have the culture in place that they do, they'll always be contenders. To me, that means that they can take some swings on stars now. It's okay. Blowing up half a draft to land a blue chip talent won't destroy them this year or for years to come.

So yes. I'm all for trading up and trying to hit a home run. I'm fine throwing caution to the wind a little bit and trusting the program these guys have built and GOING FOR IT a bit more. Whether it's a star edge or corner or receiver or whatever. If you think he can finally be that SECOND GUY that we have lacked, go get him. It'll be fine. Enough risk aversion.
 

To me, it's about probabilities and bust rate.

 

The highest we could reasonably trade would be fringe top 10. There's no sure things there. If we trade 3 picks for 1 bust it'll really hurt.

 

I also think you have better odds of finding an elite player with 3 bites in the top 60 than 1 bite in the top 13 or whatever.

[FireChans]

19 hours ago, DrMaxPower said:

To me, it's about probabilities and bust rate.

 

The highest we could reasonably trade would be fringe top 10. There's no sure things there. If we trade 3 picks for 1 bust it'll really hurt.

 

I also think you have better odds of finding an elite player with 3 bites in the top 60 than 1 bite in the top 13 or whatever.

Considering Coleman, Bishop and Carters contributions last year culminating in a AFCCG appearance, I am of the opinion that whiffing on 3 picks or whiffing on 1 player costing 3 picks CONTINUES to make our floor the divisional round of the playoffs.

 

There’s virtually no risk. The risk is not doing enough to get to a Super Bowl. That’s the ONLY risk. 
 

Another line of thought is trading for a good player that shakes loose. Less risk than a rookie.

[Logic]

22 hours ago, DrMaxPower said:

To me, it's about probabilities and bust rate.

 

The highest we could reasonably trade would be fringe top 10. There's no sure things there. If we trade 3 picks for 1 bust it'll really hurt.

 

I also think you have better odds of finding an elite player with 3 bites in the top 60 than 1 bite in the top 13 or whatever.

Fair.

Sometimes one bite at a more premium apple can be superior to three bites at less premium apples.

To use 2024 as an example, let's suppose the Bills could've traded up to pick 19 using their 2nd and 3rd round picks.

Would you rather have Keon Coleman, Cole Bishop, and DeWayne Carter...or your choice between Jared Verse and Brian Thomas Jr?

Edited Sunday at 05:56 PM by Logic

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

On 4/17/2025 at 4:17 PM, FireChans said:

I'm not sure how much of you fine folks consume NFL media, but there was a very funny story last year about how Howie Roseman and the Eagles just follow the consensus draft boards, which makes their drafting look great to the people that make those draft boards.

 

Now who knows if that's really true (it's probably not).

 

But I think it would be fun to analyze the past Bills drafts based on consensus boards and see who we "should" have taken vs who we did (I'm only doing the first 3 rounds because its exhausting)

 

So let's begin

 

2024:

#33: Coleman - Big Board (BB):Cooper DeJean DB

#60: Bishop - BB: Ennis Rakestraw JR DB

#95: Carter- BB: Troy Franklin WR

 

2023:

#25: Kincaid - BB: Nolan Smith Jr, EDGE

#59: OCT- BB: OCT!

#91: Dorian Williams - BB: Antonio Johnson, DB

 

2022:

#23: Elam - BB: Jermaine Johnson, EDGE

#63: Cook - BB: Nakobe Dean, ILB

#89: Bernard - BB: Perrion Winfrey, DL

 

2021:

#30: Rousseau - BB: JOK, ILB

#61: Boogie Basham - BB: Creed Humphrey, IOL

#93: Spencer Brown - BB: Ifeatu Melifonwu, CB

 

What does this tell us?

 

I don't know tbh. I like both lists about the same. Sorry to waste your time but discuss!

 

 

 

So how do we know the Bills wouldn't have followed the BB if every pick prior to them also followed the BB?   Maybe players were already gone or someone expected to be gone was still there so there was a deviation?