Embedded -the Bills Draft

[That's No Moon]

On 4/30/2026 at 9:29 PM, PoundingDog said:

Beane: "Jalen, how're you doing, buddy?"

Kilgore: "I'm doing good. How about you?"

Beane: "Not too bad. We're surprised you're still here but we're excited to get you, buddy."

Kilgore: "I'm so glad. You just made the best pick of the draft I promise you. Coach."

 

Com'on Jalen. Beane is NOT the coach.

He's a college football player. Everyone is coach. 

[Puckman5]

On 4/30/2026 at 8:07 PM, Chandler#81 said:

 

Did Beane get "The Clap" from McDermott or vice versa?

[Alphadawg7]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

That's not true. It is certainly not common, but pure BPA does exist. Now that player being BPA is still ultimately subjective, of course. But there are situations where teams decide a guy is just too good to leave on the board even if not a need. QB, obviously, is a different situation. 

 

But I have spoken to guys who have been senior personnel execs in the NFL. There are times when it is pure BPA. 

Except it’s not as cut and dry like that, it just isn’t.  I get what you are saying and dont disagree teams take players not at a need position…but still that BPA is always going to be at a position where they can still use a body.  Again, Bills for example are not taking a QB with a prime Josh Allen locked up.  
 

The BPA will still come from a position that can contribute.  Sure, there are times where teams take a luxury pick player, like when Bills took CJ Spiller with Lynch and Fred here already, they felt he was too talented to pass on despite already having 2 strong RBs.  
 

But they still had plans for him as a “scat” back, he was still going to play even though it wasn’t a need by a mile.  Gailey wanted a “scat back” and rather than wait they took the BPA early in the top 10 despite more pressing needs.  But they identified the role as a position of want prior to the draft, so now he was BPA on their specific board because of identifying that need prior to the draft.  So it wasn’t some guy who was going to sit at the end of the bench and not play.  
 

Pure BPA would mean they get picked even if they wont play, and that just doesn’t happen.  Everyone’s BPA fills some role or potential upgrade to their specific roster.

Edited May 2 by Alphadawg7

[HappyDays]

5 hours ago, finn said:

Like many here, I'm warming up to this draft. An early Beane fan, I've grown increasingly frustrated with his bungled or meh top picks going back years. I wanted at least one game changer and would have been happy with Concepcion. But the tradedown-fest makes sense to me, not just because it gives us more bites at the apple but because of the picks themselves. Parker looks like another Rousseau in his strengths and weaknesses, which works for me. IGB gives us matchup versatility; he's a big and strong complement to the faster, quicker but lightweight Hairston. I haven't looked into Bowry yet, but I'm happy to have a real swing tackle if he makes the grade. Everyone is raving about Bell, and he does look like good fit; could be a poor man's Diggs w/o the diva act (I hope). We badly need a linebacker, with frail little Bernard already in his countdown to his first IR listing of 2026. Orr looks like a bigger Dorian and from reports also lacks instincts, but at least he offers size there; maybe Beane can finally drop AJ Klein from his speed dial. (Countdown to signing Shaq and/or Milano... on 1, 2, 3...). And Kilgore paired with Bishop in two years may finally give us a real secondary; goodbye, Rapp and (eventually) Hamlin. I'm not the only one who is tired of hear about McDermott's "complex" defense that only Rapp, Poyer and Hamlin can run properly. Finally, I have hopes for the punter. 

 

So, yeah, maybe Beane will begin redeem himself (in my eyes) with this draft. Go Bills!

 

Good post. I think this was Beane's savviest draft since 2021. That was the covid year draft where teams couldn't follow their usual scouting process of player visits, etc. In a way I think that helped Beane by forcing him to stick to his board and draft true BPA rather than reaching for needs or perceived character fits. Basham was a complete bust but Rousseau and Brown ended up as top 20 players from that class. Stick to BPA, draft for athletic traits, prioritize premium positions early. That is the way to maximize the value of your picks. Of course you still have to nail the player evaluations but over the long term if you play the right strategy you'll win more than you lose. Overall I thought Beane stuck to that strategy in this draft. Following that strategy while also trading back to acquire value was a job well done. Now we wait to see if he got the evaluations right.

[ChevyVanMiller]

On 5/1/2026 at 7:39 AM, SoMAn said:

Thanks for sharing...man.

Brady is going to have to lose the “man” from his speech. It’s very annoying, though I hold out the possibility that he’s really bad at remembering player’s names.

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Except it’s not as cut and dry like that, it just isn’t.  I get what you are saying and dont disagree teams take players not at a need position…but still that BPA is always going to be at a position where they can still use a body.  Again, Bills for example are not taking a QB with a prime Josh Allen locked up.  
 

The BPA will still come from a position that can contribute.  Sure, there are times where teams take a luxury pick player, like when Bills took CJ Spiller with Lynch and Fred here already, they felt he was too talented to pass on despite already having 2 strong RBs.  
 

But they still had plans for him as a “scat” back, he was still going to play even though it wasn’t a need by a mile.  Gailey wanted a “scat back” and rather than wait they took the BPA early in the top 10 despite more pressing needs.  But they identified the role as a position of want prior to the draft, so now he was BPA on their specific board because of identifying that need prior to the draft.  So it wasn’t some guy who was going to sit at the end of the bench and not play.  
 

Pure BPA would mean they get picked even if they wont play, and that just doesn’t happen.  Everyone’s BPA fills some role or potential upgrade to their specific roster.

 

No I am not suggesting teams take guys they know won't play - but sometimes particularly day 1 and 2 they will say "well we didn't come in thinking we had a weakness at tackle compared to a weakness at corner and linebacker but this guy is just the best football player on the board and he is better than our starter" so even though it is making a B an A rather than making a D a B they do it. There wasn't really an example in this year's first given the class but Colston Loveland to the Bears last year was one. Cole Kmet is a good tight end. They'd paid him starter money. They had needs at edge and tackle, but they concluded Loveland was just a better football player. Therefore they took him. That was what I term a pure BPA.

Edited May 2 by GunnerBill

[HomeTeam]

I hope this class will be the group that gets us over the top. Between this class and last years class we have an infusion of talent, speed and energy into the building. 

 

I'm also optimistic that with the new coaching staff, we are actually going to play them and get early contributions. 

 

Go Bills! 

[Bermuda Triangle]

5 hours ago, ChevyVanMiller said:

Brady is going to have to lose the “man” from his speech. It’s very annoying, though I hold out the possibility that he’s really bad at remembering player’s names.

He sure did sound different in his phone call to Igbinosun.

[Alphadawg7]

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

No I am not suggesting teams take guys they know won't play - but sometimes particularly day 1 and 2 they will say "well we didn't come in thinking we had a weakness at tackle compared to a weakness at corner and linebacker but this guy is just the best football player on the board and he is better than our starter" so even though it is making a B an A rather than making a D a B they do it. There wasn't really an example in this year's first given the class but Colston Loveland to the Bears last year was one. Cole Kmet is a good tight end. They'd paid him starter money. They had needs at edge and tackle, but they concluded Loveland was just a better football player. Therefore they took him. That was what I term a pure BPA.

 

See thats where we differ - you can run 2 TE sets, like when we took Kincaid after paying Knox.  Sure they didn't need Loveland, but they could absolutely still use him if he was the best guy on the board and still play him and Kmet at the same time.  Had the Bears had both Kmet and say Trey McBride - 0% chance they would have drafted Loveland as they can't incorporate a 3rd TE and justify a top 15 pick on him. 

 

Its always still a player that fills some need or upgrade to the team, even if its a luxury pick where they have talent arleady.  No disrespect, you just keep furthering my point acutally.  There is always a value to the team, it still fills some need or they would not draft him.  So like I said, there is no such thing as 100% pure BPA, otherwise there would be no caveats to it by literal definition. 

 

So while it may be for a lower priority need, its still always has some sort of need/want built into their BPA rankings 100% of the time.

[GunnerBill]

2 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

See thats where we differ - you can run 2 TE sets, like when we took Kincaid after paying Knox.  Sure they didn't need Loveland, but they could absolutely still use him if he was the best guy on the board and still play him and Kmet at the same time.  Had the Bears had both Kmet and say Trey McBride - 0% chance they would have drafted Loveland as they can't incorporate a 3rd TE and justify a top 15 pick on him. 

 

Its always still a player that fills some need or upgrade to the team, even if its a luxury pick where they have talent arleady.  No disrespect, you just keep furthering my point acutally.  There is always a value to the team, it still fills some need or they would not draft him.  So like I said, there is no such thing as 100% pure BPA, otherwise there would be no caveats to it by literal definition. 

 

So while it may be for a lower priority need, its still always has some sort of need/want built into their BPA rankings 100% of the time.

 

The only position you can never "use" though is Quarterback. Which is why that is its own category. Take that out and the next closest is offensive tackle - but even there if a team has two tackles they like but the best guy on the board is a tackle there is a way to get him on the field - sliding someone into guard etc. 

 

And I disagree on the Bears. They believed Loveland was the best player available (I'e actually been told they had him graded as the third best player in that draft after Carter and Graham) and better than Kmet. It was as simple as that. If they believed he was better than Kmet and say McBride they'd have taken him. 

[Alphadawg7]

21 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

The only position you can never "use" though is Quarterback. Which is why that is its own category. Take that out and the next closest is offensive tackle - but even there if a team has two tackles they like but the best guy on the board is a tackle there is a way to get him on the field - sliding someone into guard etc. 

 

And I disagree on the Bears. They believed Loveland was the best player available (I'e actually been told they had him graded as the third best player in that draft after Carter and Graham) and better than Kmet. It was as simple as that. If they believed he was better than Kmet and say McBride they'd have taken him. 

 

McBride is already arguably a top 1–2 TE in the league. If he’s on the Bears, they’re not spending a top-15 pick on Loveland. That alone kills the idea of “pure” BPA.

 

And respectfully, the second you admit QB is exempt, you’ve already proven 100% BPA doesn’t exist. You can’t call something “best player available” over everything but with built-in exceptions. That’s not BPA…that’s situational drafting.

 

There has never been a true BPA pick where a team took a player they literally couldn’t use or didn’t improve their roster. Not once. Every “BPA” pick still fits a need, role, or future plan.

 

BPA isn’t some universal objective league that wide truth…it’s internal. It’s shaped by a team’s roster, scheme, gaps, scouting, and priorities. So when a team says “he was the BPA,” what they really mean is:  He was the best player for us.

 

That’s not 100% BPA. That’s BPA through a team-specific lens based on their board, their grades, their needs, their scheme.  
 

There is no such thing as “Best Available Player”…it’s always been “Best Available Player For Us”.  And there is a big difference.  
 

100% BPA is a myth.  

[GunnerBill]

2 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

BPA isn’t some universal objective league that wide truth…it’s internal. It’s shaped by a team’s roster, scheme, gaps, scouting, and priorities. So when a team says “he was the BPA,” what they really mean is:  He was the best player for us.

 

That’s not 100% BPA. That’s BPA through a team-specific lens based on their board, their grades, their needs, their scheme.  
 

There is no such thing as “Best Available Player”…it’s always been “Best Available Player For Us”.  And there is a big difference.  
 

100% BPA is a myth.  

 

On this - you are totally correct. Consensus big board rankings are for draft media only. Every team grades differently and every team's board will look different. 

 

But teams don't take guys off the board just because they don't have a need. Let's stick for a moment with the Bears and tight end... Kenyob Sadiq will still have been on their board this year (unless there was a scheme fit, measurables, injury or character reason to remove him). Do teams let need affect their grading? The reality is I think often they do - but they will all tell you they don't and they are trying not to. That is the way you make mistakes. I know someone who was in the Buccs personnel department in 2021 when they took Joe Tyron-Shoyinka at #32. He has said to me basically (paraphrased rather than direct quote) 'we talked ourselves into a first round grade on him because we needed an edge rusher of his profile. We didn't reach on draft night by our board. He was in the cluster of guys we had at the top when we went on the clock, but we should never have had a first on him. He was not close to that in reality.' The guy who told me that is in another personnel role with another franchise now and basically said he uses that example in board building meetings all the time as a cautionary tale. 

 

So with the caveat that I agree BPA is not an objective and universal concept - there are still picks in the NFL draft where teams have a guy sticking out on their board and take him even at a non-need. Some teams stick closer to that approach but nobody is a 100% BPA team who just take the top player on their board every pick. 

[Mikey152]

On 5/2/2026 at 3:39 PM, GunnerBill said:

 

No I am not suggesting teams take guys they know won't play - but sometimes particularly day 1 and 2 they will say "well we didn't come in thinking we had a weakness at tackle compared to a weakness at corner and linebacker but this guy is just the best football player on the board and he is better than our starter" so even though it is making a B an A rather than making a D a B they do it. There wasn't really an example in this year's first given the class but Colston Loveland to the Bears last year was one. Cole Kmet is a good tight end. They'd paid him starter money. They had needs at edge and tackle, but they concluded Loveland was just a better football player. Therefore they took him. That was what I term a pure BPA.

Usually, that’s when you try to trade down. if you can’t make a deal you take them and figure it out later.

 

i doubt that happens early very often, though…there aren’t enough guys gone to create that gap. Usually when it does, Bills  have been good about trading back…same draft value (or better) with better roster fit. 
 

the only thing I think I would change is I do think I wish they would target more future picks so they could occasionally move up in a early round for once without tanking the rest of their draft 

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, Mikey152 said:

Usually, that’s when you try to trade down. if you can’t make a deal you take them and figure it out later.

 

i doubt that happens early very often, though…there aren’t enough guys gone to create that gap. Usually when it does, Bills  have been good about trading back…same draft value (or better) with better roster fit. 
 

the only thing I think I would change is I do think I wish they would target more future picks so they could occasionally move up in a early round for once without tanking the rest of their draft 

 

If it happens early it is normally a non premium position guy sliding out of the top 10 because of positional value. Kyle Hamilton was an example of it. Ravens had two established starters at safety at the time but the 2nd or 3rd best player in the draft was there ar #15 or #16 or wherever they took him.

 

[Dunkirk Donski]

On 4/30/2026 at 9:29 PM, PoundingDog said:

Beane: "Jalen, how're you doing, buddy?"

Kilgore: "I'm doing good. How about you?"

Beane: "Not too bad. We're surprised you're still here but we're excited to get you, buddy."

Kilgore: "I'm so glad. You just made the best pick of the draft I promise you. Coach."

 

Com'on Jalen. Beane is NOT the coach.

BUST

[No_Matter_What]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

If it happens early it is normally a non premium position guy sliding out of the top 10 because of positional value. Kyle Hamilton was an example of it. Ravens had two established starters at safety at the time but the 2nd or 3rd best player in the draft was there ar #15 or #16 or wherever they took him.

 

Would be sort of interesting to see what would've Ravens done if Downs was available at 14 this year

[PoundingDog]

1 hour ago, Dunkirk Donski said:

BUST

 

The key phrase here is "You just made the best pick of the draft I promise you."

 

That's pretty bold, excitement or rushing adrenalin aside. I don't know how many guys drafted on Day 3 would've said that. On the positive side, clearly the guy has confidence, is ultra competitive, and, to me the most likely, has a big chip on his shoulder after sitting out draft day 1, day 2, even a full round  in day 3. On the negative side, guys with that attitude may not fare well when he finds out NFL is full of guys BETTER than him, or if he does well, he is more likely than others to go the route of Antonio Brown of "I'm the best, deserve the best of any thing."

 

For reference, Josh Allen told Beane right after the Bills pick something like Thank you for making the leap and putting your faith in me. Kalil Shakir said something like You are getting a true dog and I'll do whatever the team needs. Gabe Davis said to Beane You are going to get the best out of me. Kaiir Elam asked Beane to put the play book on the plane and he knew it was something special. It turns out Josh, Kalil, and Gabe said exactly what they become, especially of the characterization of Kalil as a dog for the Bills WR corp and Davis played his best as a Bill. Kaiir became "special" as the only outright 1st round bust of Beans GM tenure so far.

[Kelly No huddle]

 

 

He looks like Derrick Burroughs!!

 

 

Edited May 5 by Kelly No huddle

[skibum]

They sure make it look like we got a great crop of players. If it's all true, I feel better about this draft after having watched it. Let's hope it's not just good editing. 

[Sierra Foothills]

On 4/30/2026 at 7:42 PM, BuffaloBillyG said:

A few of my thoughts after watching.

 

1. I know he owns the team, but please don't let Terry call the new guys. The less talk Terry does the better. Maybe tell him the draft war room is in Florida next year.

 

I feel like Terry should always have an interpreter... after fielding a question from the media he then directs his answer to the interpreter who relays an intelligible and coherent response that people can actually understand without their heads exploding.

 

On 5/1/2026 at 9:42 AM, No_Matter_What said:

I was surprised that Beane said he had asked scouts who they liked before Day 3.

 

Sound strange to me. I'd expect them to have all these conversations before the draft and create firm big board after those. And then just stick with it.

 

Like @EmotionallyUnstable said, ranking players on the board before the draft starts is not the same thing as reading the board mid-draft.

 

I feel like the board becomes almost a living thing with different trends and diminishing commodities and those things effect valuation atop the initial ranking.

 

On 5/1/2026 at 10:11 AM, Billy Claude said:

If that was true he wouldn't have blown up at those guys from WGR.   He also wouldn't be constantly leaking stories about how the Bills almost got this or that guy.

 

I know what you're saying about the WGR episode but I would add that Beane was listening to the broadcast while waiting to join the show and had to listen to these two idiots criticizing his work.

 

Overall I would rank Beane as fairly media savvy... aware of what's being said but not overly concerned with it... and he's not one of these liars who claim to have no idea what the conversations are outside the building.

 

On 5/1/2026 at 1:21 PM, BuffaloBillyG said:

I think Bell is going to be decent. He strikes me as a guy that has some production...but I see good, not great. Would love it if he was. 

 

With Kilgore I see a guy that could be amazing.

 

I think more than good vs great, you like to see where a player brings something that the team needs and doesn't have. I think Bell does that... I don't see him as redundant to Shakir.

 

On 5/2/2026 at 9:35 AM, That's No Moon said:

He's a college football player. Everyone is coach. 

 

Exactly. Some younger people have been taught to address their elders as "sir."

 

This is kinda the same thing.

 

As far as @NeverOutNick's suggestion that Beane is sometimes conservative, I agree. I absolutely believe that there are high-variance, boom/bust players out there and that Beane tends to shy away from them.

 

That said, I think Beane is an excellent GM.

 

I also agree with @GunnerBill that there are sometimes obvious BPAs during the draft... often signified by standing out like a sore thumb among the undrafted players.