Einstein's Dog

What? Some fans think Jack Campbell would be an excellent choice. Why is Jack Campbell (JC) bad value at #27 and D Sanders is not, if the Bills have Campbell rated higher? Many mocks have Sanders going before our pick, and GB above ranks Simpson at #16. I could see Beane valuing JC at $4M on a one year deal if he were a free agent, certainly above the slotted $2.5M they would pay. That's immediate value. Outside of the top 3 WRs, they are not worth over $2.5M for the year, you are paying on the hope of rise in future value (and JC's value would rise also). I've suggested that Jack Campbell may have separated himself as the top candidate with the combine. I've tried my best to give forewarning to the board that if Beane sees it way, not only would JC be the first pick, Beane might move up to do it.

I understand taking the tape over the combine. You went further than that though and started to discount Campbells combine. The larger point though is, I believe your ranking does not match the Bills (and probably not the Giants either). And I'm starting to think the gulf between Campbell and the next rated mlb could be significant. So much so that if things break in a somewhat expected way, (like top 3 WRs gone and top OL gone and all 3 mlbs available) at #22, the Bills would be tempted to jump the Giants. Most of the board would not like it, but I can see it.

I get it, you didn't see it on tape. You didn't expect good results from Campbell. And when confronted with the good results you make excuses for them to discount the data point and keep your preconceived bias. You didn't see twitch and assumed Campbell was slow, you didn't see change of direction and assumed Campbell had poor lateral movements. Combine results show your conclusions were wrong. Most of the field is training for the combine. So yes, it is a diss when you imply that Campbell's numbers are somehow less meaningful. Often times the RAS can be used as a negative. It can be used as indicator that a prospect doesn't have the requisite physical attributes to succeed, such as speed or agility. Clearly these limitations are not applicable to Campbell. It doesn't matter if he trained, he can do it.

Are you kidding with the "he did some serious combine training" diss? What serious candidate wouldn't? You don't think Sanders trained? You're entitled to your opinion, but discounting Campbells results by coming up with some type of "he gamed the system" theory is fabricating an excuse to support your bias. Extra points for taking Campbells care for the game, intelligence, and a good family and twisting it into a negative. The RAS has always been one data point to consider. You don't see a huge gap but when I look at several data points - RAS, advantage in mlb experience, awards (Butkus), along with markers indicating intelligence (gpa), loyalty (no transfers), and team personality (captain)- Campbell looks like he is in a tier of his own. I wouldn't be surprised if the top 3 WRs and top OL are gone by #22, that the Bills make a small move to get ahead of the Giants to get Campbell.

I'm still hoping for DHop or Jeudy too. I don't think we're out of it until after the draft. Schefter's reasoning was suspect - the Bills have the want, and a way to get the funds. He didn't say what the Bills were missing. As for the draft, I differ with you there - I don't think the Bills would (or should) select Hyatt or Q Johnston over Jack Campbell. And yes, while the WR group would be a little disappointing it would be on par with what we had last year - and we were good last year.

Wow. Thanks for posting. Campbell has awards and "Above-average size and frame with room to add more mass" and yet two others are ahead of him. Wonder how the Bills view it. Would be interesting to see if they are all available what the Bills would do. What grade and round did they have for Sanders and Simpson?

I have been working hard to prepare you for the possibility. You may not consider it a premium position but our last player just left for $18M. Getting a vet replacement had around a $7M price tag for the Bobby Wagners of the world. The Bills are a mature, contending team. They need value from the draft. The downside of J Campbell is Poz, for J Hyatt is Sherfield, for Q Johnston it is Hodgins. It's not the consensus that you should concern yourself with, it's the other GMs. I think Beane is much more clued into what Schoen knows than you. It's likely they discussed the whole Edmunds saga years ago. It doesn't seem like a stretch that Jack Campbell stood out even then.

And if the Bills have no interest in WR, it looks like they are taking some for the ride. Just as they have for years on end with the RB joke. This years chuckle in the front office has to be the leaked report they were moving up for "offensive playmakers". How does that originate? The FO saying to each other, these loose lipped teams ahead of us are going to let it slip that we're inquiring about what it takes to move up. We better tell them it's for offensive talent, otherwise everyone and their brother would be able to see that the Bills have to get ahead of the Giants to get Jack Campbell. People seemed to buy it, well done FO, lets change the news cycle quickly. What a coincidence, JSN is coming for a visit. Can the Bills get JSN? Where is he scheduled to go? What would it take for the Bills? Keep the news cycle moving. Next week a visit by Q Johnston would seal it. The board will then be saying things like "there's too much smoke...."

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. 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.

Don't get me wrong, I would love it if the Bills got JSN. I just have trouble believing it could happen though. I'm glad you have pegged the move up at zero though. For some reason it will make me smile if it happens. Seems like a real consideration to me. The NY Giants need an MLB. Getting ahead of Schoen/Daboll might be very important - they know too much.

I have not given up hope on a trade for a veteran WR. That would move the needle, much like Von did last year. The majority of the funds would come from doing something with Oliver. And there would be much rejoicing. When they didn't extend Oliver early, he became "iffy" in my mind. My best case scenario is still alive. I wish ErieCountyBulls would confirm it so everyone else could be happy.

Please don't encourage whorlnut's conspiracy theories, it already looks like he's going to lose it if we trade up and draft Jack Campbell. Yes, the players can have some input. Just like what was reported to help Dorsey get the job. And last year when the offense sputtered the veteran players did not say "let's get the rookies more involved". No, they went out and brought back Smoke and Beas. What the FO is doing to help the offense is moving monetary resources over from defense to more investment in offense. Seems like they were prepared to let Poyer walk, until they got an unexpected bargain, let Edmunds go, and Oliver is iffy. The FO already did some OL upgrades, and tweaking to the WR group. All big move talk has centered on name WRs (Dhop, OBJ) in contrast to last year when it centered on pass rushers.

Don't worry about the intelligence of the coaching staff, the GM is smart enough not to put them in that bind. The FO already bought a Hyatt clone for a third less of the price, so not happening. A TE2 to replace Morris, complete luxury pick, not happening (at least not in the 1st round).

The idea of drafting a WR or TE2 is exciting. It means the FO sees a huge talent. But IMO it is unlikely. From a financial perspective, picking at 27 is around a $2.5M spot. We just picked up someone comparable to J Hyatt for under $2M, we had someone on our practice squad sniped on us comparable to Q Johnson - Hodgins. Our TE2's have salaries under $3M - even OJ Howard. Or the Bills can take what looks like a comparable to the guy that just left us for $18M.

Doc - I understand I have a different viewpoint. But you do have to admit the whole "reach" discussion is based on people's expectations. I can't stop people from losing their mind when the Bills move up to draft Jack Campbell but I can give fair warning. In my mind it makes sense. Beane would be moving up to get ahead of the Giants. It would be especially painful for Beane to be sniped by Shoen/Giants for JC. The threat of the Giants is real - currently their starting lb is someone named Bobby Okereke. Give me a break, that sounds pathetic. The needs writeup says the Giants need an lb, "a run thumper would be perfect". I can understand moving ahead of the Giants.

I don't think the Tremaine experience hurts, 5 years of excellent average cost and a third rounder on the way out.

They say the draft is for the future. And by drafting properly the SB window will still be open 8 years from now - we'll still have J Allen, the main component. Most picks won't factor much in 2023 - IOL, WR, and especially TE would start as backups. Jack Campbell has the quickest path to 2023 relevance of anyone they could take.

There seems to be this echo chamber that you can trade down and get Jack Campbell (JC) Pure conjecture. I believe JC is in a tier of his own at the top of the mlb rankings, and for good reason, he is a decorated, experienced, high IQ, big person with a huge RAS. I believe the FO interest in what it would take to move up is based on getting JC. The offensive weapon rouse was classic Beane. The lb needs of NYG and possibly Dallas (if B Robinson is gone) scare Beane. We've seen the FO get nervous before just last year and I don't think they regret it at all (remember our 4th Balt got went to a punter). Another disadvantage to trading down is the FO would regret not getting JC in the 1st round for the 5 year deal. JC is a great candidate to be extended after year 3 like the smart teams do when they know they have a keeper (see J Allen/D Knox/T White).

If the 5th WR is ranked higher then you take him. I'm telling you I don't think that will be the case. Last year they could have had the WR C Watkins that was an RAS freak that went to GB or G Pickens who went to Pitt. Both better than what I believe they would see this year. And yet, they moved up and got the cb they feared would be picked ahead of them. Beane may be looking at what it takes to move up because of Dallas interest in mlb. For instance if B Robinson is gone (another Dallas rumored target) the threat of Dallas taking an mlb increases. If the FO has a clear top tier favorite (hopefully Campbell) they might want to jump Dallas. It's not so far-fetched since they just did something similar last year.

If Campbell is their man, and he is there, I think they would gladly take him. I think the risk is much more that as the pick gets closer the pressure to move up and get him intensifies. I could see nervousness of the Dallas pick - I've seem mocks with Dallas taking D Sanders. I think the scenario happened last year with cb/Elam.

It's weird to me that the rumor's get so specific. Why put "offensive player" in the supposed rumor? I could see leakage of real phone contacts between Beane and other decision makers on other teams. Others might catch wind of that. But how would that morph into the knowledge that it was for offensive players?

I didn't say it was a reach, I said it was riskier, and it is. Seems hard to argue that the odds of the fifth receiver beating out Gabe and/or Shakir are less than the odds of the top mlb beating out Bernard. Swinging for the fences is in FA or trades - that would be the DHop hope (much like Von last year). The draft is for the future. Jack Campbell would be 3 years of bargain prices and then extended early at market prices.

No, the logic is mlb is much safer. WR's are risky (see K Benjamin, Z Jones). Also the drafted mlb would have greater odds of starting, makes financial sense, and is easy to incorporate into the starting lineup. The Bills could have the top pick at mlb vs the 5th pick at the risky WR position. Of course the Bills could draft a WR, but they probably won't. The conservative, financially sound, safer move, is mlb.

2023 NFL Mock Draft: Seahawks move up to grab eventual Geno Smith replacement; three big mock trades in top 10 - CBSSports.com I guess I didn't get the link, but Tom Fornelli of CBS sports has Campbell going at #27 today. It's the finances that make it so logical. Getting a WR who is WR3 being paid more than Gabe who is starting above him might be a problem Getting an RB making more than our starting 2 ahead of him makes no sense. Getting a TE2 for $3M is a waste. Getting a starting mlb who is very good at $3M/yr for the next 4 years makes a lot of financial sense.

I think you are projecting what you want. They very well could be seeing what it might take to move up to get Campbell. If D Sanders goes off the board at around 21, the FO could get very nervous. This just happened last year with Elam. While a lot of posters would love to see a move to get Q Johnston (myself included) which, by the way, is very different than the cringe worthy prospect of moving up for Bijan Robinson (which would make me violently ill), I don't think the FO would take such a risk. The FO has an excellent opportunity to get a good 4-5 year starting mlb for around $3M/yr. Do it.