Drew Sanders vs Jack Campbell

[Doc]

48 minutes ago, TOboy said:

He’s bigger. He’s most definitely not faster and more agile. Campbell may be more instinctive, and is certainly more proven to be able to get off blocks, a more natural MLB if you will. 
 

Sanders is a little lighter, just as tall, and certainly moves better. I think he’s got the higher upside, but maybe a lower floor. 
 

Really depends on what they are looking for. I think Sanders is more of an Edmunds clone (not exactly but more stylistic match), and Campbell is more of a thumper. 

 

Looking at the numbers, Campbell bested Sanders in every measurable except 40-time (4.65 versus 4.59), but the differences are that Sanders' numbers were from his Pro Day (where players typically test better) and at 14# lighter (big affect on speed/agility).  Have Campbell drop a few pounds and he likely improves on those numbers while have Sanders add weight and his drop. 

 

32 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

No. I mean the fans when I say "they" not the Bills.

 

I don't think anyone wants a 90's thumper. 

[GunnerBill]

9 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

I don't think anyone wants a 90's thumper. 

 

From reading 5 years worth of comments on Edmunds that is what this board leans towards. A lot of people just want a physical hitter.

[LyndonvilleBill]

28 minutes ago, NewEra said:

I prefer Dane Brugler over everyone. 
His current top 100 includes: 
31 Sanders

37 Simpson 

53 Campbell

64 Henley

98 To’oTo’o

 

 

 

 

I prefer multiple versus one persons opinion. 🤷‍♂️

 

 

 

[Chaos]

1 hour ago, TOboy said:

He’s bigger. He’s most definitely not faster and more agile. Campbell may be more instinctive, and is certainly more proven to be able to get off blocks, a more natural MLB if you will. 
 

Sanders is a little lighter, just as tall, and certainly moves better. I think he’s got the higher upside, but maybe a lower floor. 
 

Really depends on what they are looking for. I think Sanders is more of an Edmunds clone (not exactly but more stylistic match), and Campbell is more of a thumper. 

 

Campbell measures better in the shuttle. Measures better in the 3 cone.  Measures better in vertical. Measures better in Broad Jump.  A tick slower in the 40. 

Better in pass coverage. Calling him a "thumper" who is deficient in other areas is ridiculous. 

 

 

 

[HappyDays]

18 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

From reading 5 years worth of comments on Edmunds that is what this board leans towards. A lot of people just want a physical hitter.

 

I do want a physical hitter. That isn't the same as a Brandon Spikes-esque downhill thumper though. I know Campbell can't cover sideline to sideline as well as Edmunds. But he apparently still covers very well in zone and also tackles well.

[Doc]

25 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

From reading 5 years worth of comments on Edmunds that is what this board leans towards. A lot of people just want a physical hitter.

 

4 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

I do want a physical hitter. That isn't the same as a Brandon Spikes-esque downhill thumper though. I know Campbell can't cover sideline to sideline as well as Edmunds. But he apparently still covers very well in zone and also tackles well.

 

This.  We want a player with Edmunds' athleticism but MLB  instincts.

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I do want a physical hitter. That isn't the same as a Brandon Spikes-esque downhill thumper though. I know Campbell can't cover sideline to sideline as well as Edmunds. But he apparently still covers very well in zone and also tackles well.

 

I wasn't saying Campbell is just a 90s thumper. I was just commenting on that particular post. 

 

I think Campbell is more of a downhill type than Edmunds or Sanders / Simpson. But he isn't Brandon Spikes. He can cover in zone. He can't shadow in 1v1 as well as the other guys.

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

I think you can get one of these guys with our second pick.

[NewEra]

25 minutes ago, LyndonvilleBill said:

I prefer multiple versus one persons opinion. 🤷‍♂️

 

 

 

I read them all, but have been following Dane for awhile.  I think he has a better grasp evaluating talent than most. 

[John from Riverside]

10 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I do want a physical hitter. That isn't the same as a Brandon Spikes-esque downhill thumper though. I know Campbell can't cover sideline to sideline as well as Edmunds. But he apparently still covers very well in zone and also tackles well.

I want a guy that’s got good instincts you can make up for a tick of a second in speed if you have good instincts
 

Being a hitter doesn’t really bother me as long as they can get them on the ground

 

also, it would be nice to have a guy that didn’t need perfect defense of lineman in front of him in order to get off blocks and make tackles

[GunnerBill]

28 minutes ago, Chaos said:

 

Campbell measures better in the shuttle. Measures better in the 3 cone.  Measures better in vertical. Measures better in Broad Jump.  A tick slower in the 40. 

Better in pass coverage. Calling him a "thumper" who is deficient in other areas is ridiculous. 

 

 

 

 

To be clear I (can't speak for others) was not calling Campbell a thumper. I was replying to a specific post about what Bills fans lean towards in linebackers. 

 

But I would say, and indeed have said, I think Campbell tested a little better than he plays per his tape. 

 

I am not anti-Campbell. He is the highest floor of the top 3 linebackers. I think he might be the lowest ceiling though. If we ended up with any of Campbell, Simpson or Sanders I'd feel pretty good about the MLB spot in the medium term. 

[Doc]

26 minutes ago, D. L. Hot-Flamethrower said:

I think you can get one of these guys with our second pick.

 

At 59?  No chance.  I'd even bet that one of them will go to the Steelers at 32.

[TOboy]

58 minutes ago, Chaos said:

 

Campbell measures better in the shuttle. Measures better in the 3 cone.  Measures better in vertical. Measures better in Broad Jump.  A tick slower in the 40. 

Better in pass coverage. Calling him a "thumper" who is deficient in other areas is ridiculous. 

 

 

 

Who said he was deficient in other areas? 
 

I like Campbell. He’s decent in zone coverage, but his tape doesn’t show as fluid an athlete as either Simpson or Sanders. That’s not a knock, they are physical freaks. The fact Campbell tested that well is very encouraging. 

[Billz4ever]

5 hours ago, FrenchConnection said:

the posters on TBD tend to skew older. They want a white LB with a mullet and a neck pad, like it was 1995. Edmunds was a modern LB and was hated here because he is a coverage LB and not Shane Conlin.

I don't give a rats arse what color the guy is.  I want the guy who can fill a hole, who's a dependable tackler, and who has good MLB instincts.

 

IMO, the guy that does those three things the best coming right out of college is Campbell. Maybe someone else will eventually be better, but that's why they are a bigger gamble. We need to make solid hits, especially this draft.

[Sherlock Holmes]

3 hours ago, Chaos said:

Campbell is bigger stronger faster more agile.  he led the nation in pass coverage from the LB position in 2022. Why is Sanders better?

Because he's not white 

[newcam2012]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I wasn't saying Campbell is just a 90s thumper. I was just commenting on that particular post. 

 

I think Campbell is more of a downhill type than Edmunds or Sanders / Simpson. But he isn't Brandon Spikes. He can cover in zone. He can't shadow in 1v1 as well as the other guys.

I think Campbell is the best LB in the draft. He'd be a good fit in the Bills D. Ideally, the Bills move down a tad and pick up Campbell with extra picks added. 

[RunTheBall]

3 minutes ago, newcam2012 said:

I think Campbell is the best LB in the draft. He'd be a good fit in the Bills D. Ideally, the Bills move down a tad and pick up Campbell with extra picks added. 

I’d agree but if Beane thinks he’s the guy I doubt he takes the chance of moving down. I say that because he’s got a habit of targeting specific players and moving up the board to get them, so I don’t think he’s worried about over-drafting a guy if he’s there.

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

At 59?  No chance.  I'd even bet that one of them will go to the Steelers at 32.

Oh well then you don't take the 53rd rated player at 27

[Chaos]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

But I would say, and indeed have said, I think Campbell tested a little better than he plays per his tape. 

You watch more tape than me. (And i on on record of wanting to go for Darnell Wright with #27).  But I think regarding Campbell, you need to watch his tape  again when he is in coverage.  He is so much smoother in his change of direction than Edmunds, it looks slower, but I am pretty certaion he is not slower on the change in directions. His measurements reflect what is on tape.  It is just different than frantic change of directions Edmunds had to make to recover from his lack of instincts. 

[KCNC]

I trust McBeane to pick the best one that fits the Bills.

[Doc]

11 minutes ago, D. L. Hot-Flamethrower said:

Oh well then you don't take the 53rd rated player at 27

 

Rankings only mean so much.

[BigAl2526]

Sanders is a little faster, a tiny bit shorter and quite a bit lighter.  Campbell, besides being bigger, is quite a bit more experienced.  Between the two of them, Buffalo has to decide, I think who has the higher ceiling.  Part of that is deciding to what extent Drew Sanders' shortcomings can be coached up.  There is, of course, no guarantee the Bills will draft either one.  

[GunnerBill]

46 minutes ago, newcam2012 said:

I think Campbell is the best LB in the draft. He'd be a good fit in the Bills D. Ideally, the Bills move down a tad and pick up Campbell with extra picks added. 

 

He is the most pro ready for sure.

28 minutes ago, Chaos said:

You watch more tape than me. (And i on on record of wanting to go for Darnell Wright with #27).  But I think regarding Campbell, you need to watch his tape  again when he is in coverage.  He is so much smoother in his change of direction than Edmunds, it looks slower, but I am pretty certaion he is not slower on the change in directions. His measurements reflect what is on tape.  It is just different than frantic change of directions Edmunds had to make to recover from his lack of instincts. 

 

He is good in zone. But he doesn't have those sudden movement skills when matched up. 

[starrymessenger]

6 hours ago, TheyCallMeAndy said:

From what I can gather:

 

Sanders - Better athlete, 1 year starter, very raw, poor tackler, great blitzer.

 

Campbell - Better size, much more consistent, elite intangibles and leadership. 
 

Sanders has the higher ceiling, Campbell has a higher floor.

 

I do feel one of these two will be the pick at 27.

I dont see the Bills going for Sanders to fill the MLB hole. In my opinion it’s between Campbell and Simpson. 

[mrags]

Both are pretty good. I’d just prefer Sewell in the later rounds 

[TheyCallMeAndy]

2 hours ago, starrymessenger said:

I dont see the Bills going for Sanders to fill the MLB hole. In my opinion it’s between Campbell and Simpson. 

Apparently Simpson doesn’t project to MLB well, more of a OLB.

[akcash]

Give me some Drew Sanders... I don't even know what round is his projected... what u guys think. I'd take Campbell in the third. Or if we trade back in 2nd. Not using premium picks on a mediocre MLB.

[Freddie's Dead]

8 hours ago, Snappysnackcakes said:

If you’re gonna put nonsense like this out here, at least spell the name correctly. It’s Shane Conlan. And he would do well in today’s NFL. BTW, he never had a mullet. 

 

You beat me to it.

[Goin Breakdown]

[starrymessenger]

30 minutes ago, TheyCallMeAndy said:

Apparently Simpson doesn’t project to MLB well, more of a OLB.

I agree that hes not your ideal traditional 4/3 stack linebacker, and he played some WILL in college, but Bills base defence is nickel and hes best as a nickel linebacker. So scheme wise I dont think there should be a problem.

[Green Lightning]

10 hours ago, FrenchConnection said:

the posters on TBD tend to skew older. They want a white LB with a mullet and a neck pad, like it was 1995. Edmunds was a modern LB and was hated here because he is a coverage LB and not Shane Conlin.

I skew older and at any age your post is asinine. 

[BillsNutHawaii]

10 hours ago, FrenchConnection said:

the posters on TBD tend to skew older. They want a white LB with a mullet and a neck pad, like it was 1995. Edmunds was a modern LB and was hated here because he is a coverage LB and not Shane Conlin.

Lol…. You had me at “1995”

[KOKBILLS]

I like both...

 

Sanders is definitely the more explosive athlete...He's a better Pass Rusher...But give me Cpt Jack...I'm just a fan. He's cerebral. Whatever he lacks (and that's not much, his RAS is elite) he's going to make up for it with instincts, smarts, and he's a leader...

 

I think all things considered Campbell is just about best-case-scenario to replace Edmunds. You get a young guy with a great size, smarts, intangibles...A team Captain...And when you're trying to win a SB that's a big win...

[Snappysnackcakes]

6 hours ago, Doc said:

 

 

This.  We want a player with Edmunds' athleticism but MLB  instincts.

This^^^^^^^

[BADOLBILZ]

6 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

He is the most pro ready for sure.

 

He is good in zone. But he doesn't have those sudden movement skills when matched up. 

 

 

Not that sudden movement skills helped Tremaine Edmunds much in man coverage.   Despite the hype about him being able to play nickel corner at VA Tech he didn't pee a drop in man coverage in his career in Buffalo and in the rare instance when he had the foresight to identify where a ball was going in time to easily defend the pass he would focus on running thru the player rather than playing the ball.   He had something of a bounce-back year in coverage last year but the prior two years teams threw at him even when he had great position because his ball skills are incredibly poor.   His physical talent/potential will be hard to beat but his lack of awareness in the heat of a play will not be hard for his successor to surpass. 

[BillsFanForever19]

I know everyone loves Jack Campbell. But I think he's just poor value at 27. I'd hope we'd trade down from 27 or up from 59 if he's who they want.

 

It's odd to me that a place that I see so often posting "you don't reach for need" is so keen on it this year with Campbell.

 

A lot of people were torching Beane for "reaching" for Elam last year. Campbell seems to be a much bigger reach at 27 this year than Elam was at 23 last year.

Edited April 3, 2023 by BillsFanForever19

[Utah John]

15 hours ago, Snappysnackcakes said:

If you’re gonna put nonsense like this out here, at least spell the name correctly. It’s Shane Conlan. And he would do well in today’s NFL. BTW, he never had a mullet. 

Conlan was a great mid-field thumper, but his 40 time was measured with a sundial.  Watching him chase someone was just pathetic.  MLBs like him were great in their day but not now. 

[frostbitmic]

It doesn't much matter, Beane will wait until the 2nd round for a LB (Sewell, Henley or Overshown).

 

The first round is for DE/Edge to get after the QB of course. The Bills have a number of guys that chase QBs around pretty well but the only guy that seems to get them on the ground is Miller, who has OG Knees.

[SoCal Deek]

8 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

I know everyone loves Jack Campbell. But I think he's just poor value at 27. I'd hope we'd trade down from 27 or up from 59 if he's who they want.

 

It's odd to me that a place that I see so often posting "you don't reach for need" is so keen on it this year with Campbell.

 

A lot of people were torching Beane for "reaching" for Elam last year. Campbell seems to be a much bigger reach at 27 this year than Elam was at 23 last year.

That is an interesting perspective. I’d say the difference this year is that we don’t seem to have a MLB on the roster, at all. Which is a pretty darn big hole if you ask me. So unless you’re ready to go through the season with the couple of middle/late round kids they drafted last year you’re taking a mighty big gamble that the Board falls your way. (It’s why Beane gets the big bucks.) 

[Doc]

16 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

That is an interesting perspective. I’d say the difference this year is that we don’t seem to have a MLB on the roster, at all. Which is a pretty darn big hole if you ask me. So unless you’re ready to go through the season with the couple of middle/late round kids they drafted last year you’re taking a mighty big gamble that the Board falls your way. (It’s why Beane gets the big bucks.) 

 

And saying someone is poor value before the draft is subjective.  All it takes is for some team to draft him higher than you were going to and then see that player become a stud.  Again I think that the latest he goes is 32, to the Steelers.  But I don't have a crystal ball.