July 2026
The model's most likely 2027 draft — board fit × team need × draft order, straight from the same simulator you can run yourself. Frozen in July 2026; no edits, no retcons. Come April, every pick gets graded. Ranks quoted in the pick arguments are as of the freeze date — the live board keeps moving; this page doesn't.
The percentage is the simulator's probability of that exact pick at that slot across thousands of runs — low numbers mean a genuinely open board, not a hedge.
Round 1
The case ▸The case ▾
Little suspense at No. 1 — the offensive line is the bigger hole, but the model will not pass on the board's best player to chase it, and the simulator sends Smith to the Cardinals in every single run. Model and market agree on the player — first on both boards.
The case ▸The case ▾
This is the house being the house: consensus puts Johnson 14th, the model says 21st, and the model is doing the picking. The board's best player outranks a needs list that starts with the secondary. The simulator lands here in 99 percent of runs — strong conviction by mock standards.
The case ▸The case ▾
Moore is the pick because the room and the board agree: the simulator lands here in 92 percent of runs, and a first-round quarterback still on the board overrides any needs list. Model and market agree on the player — seventh on our board, sixth by consensus.
The case ▸The case ▾
Little suspense at No. 4 — the front seven sits near the top of the Titans' needs list, and the simulator sends Stone to the Titans in 65 percent of runs. Consensus is actually higher on him than the model (11th to 19th), which makes the price at No. 4 easy.
The case ▸The case ▾
The simulator calls this one: Coleman goes here in 99 percent of runs, because the playmaker corps is a genuine need for the Raiders. Model and market agree on the player — sixth on our board, eighth by consensus.
The case ▸The case ▾
A first-round QB on the board bends every plan — the simulator lands here in 71 percent of runs, and a first-round quarterback still on the board overrides any needs list. Model and market agree on the player — 11th on our board, 10th by consensus.
The case ▸The case ▾
You will not find Green this high in other mocks — consensus says 25th. The model disagrees, 69th on our board, and the secondary is the bigger hole, but the model will not pass on the board's best player to chase it. The pick shows up in 63 percent of simulator runs, strong conviction by mock standards.
The case ▸The case ▾
The front seven is the roster's biggest hole; Simmons answers it without a reach — No. 4 on the model's board. Model and market agree on the player — fourth on our board, second by consensus.
The case ▸The case ▾
The model is planting a flag: it ranks Lacy 17th while consensus has him 27th. Call it a reach if you like, but the playmaker corps is the roster's biggest hole. The pick shows up in 44 percent of simulator runs, a real edge over the alternatives.
The case ▸The case ▾
Little suspense at No. 10 — the board's best player outranks a needs list that starts with the front seven, and the simulator sends Williams to the Giants in 50 percent of runs. The model is higher on him than the market, 10th against a consensus 21st.
The case ▸The case ▾
Stewart at No. 11 is the value of the round on paper — consensus has him third. The model is cooler, 24th on our board, which is exactly why he is still here. The front seven is the roster's biggest hole, so the marriage is easy.
The case ▸The case ▾
Washington is the pick because the front seven is the roster's biggest hole, and the board cooperates: he is the model's No. 27 player. Consensus is actually higher on him than the model (16th to 27th), which makes the price at No. 12 easy.
The case ▸The case ▾
Little suspense at No. A first-round QB on the board bends every plan — a first-round quarterback still on the board overrides any needs list, and the simulator sends Sayin to the Vikings in 68 percent of runs. The model is higher on him than the market, 14th against a consensus 23rd.
The case ▸The case ▾
The board made this pick, not the need chart — consensus puts Craver outside the top 60, the model says 60th, and the model is doing the picking. The playmaker corps sits near the top of the Falcons' needs list. The simulator lands here in 28 percent of runs — a modest edge on an open board.
The case ▸The case ▾
Echoles is the pick because the front seven is the roster's biggest hole, and the board cooperates: he is the model's No. 9 player. He is unranked in our consensus feed, so the model's ninth-overall call stands alone.
The case ▸The case ▾
By consensus this is larceny: the market ranks Moore fourth overall and he is still on the board at No. 16. The model is the reason he lasted — it has him second, right around this slot — but at this price the argument makes itself. The simulator lands here in 60 percent of runs — strong conviction by mock standards.
The case ▸The case ▾
The board made this pick, not the need chart — consensus puts Mensah 35th, the model says 47th, and the model is doing the picking. A first-round QB on the board bends every plan — a first-round quarterback still on the board overrides any needs list. The pick shows up in 68 percent of simulator runs, strong conviction by mock standards.
The case ▸The case ▾
Bolden is the pick because the secondary sits near the top of the Jaguars' needs list, and the board cooperates: he is the model's No. 8 player. The model is higher on him than the market, eighth against a consensus 13th.
The case ▸The case ▾
You will not find Robinson this high in other mocks — consensus says outside the top 80. The model disagrees, 230th on our board, and the front seven is the bigger hole, but the model will not pass on the board's best player to chase it. The pick shows up in 15 percent of simulator runs, a genuinely open slot. One pick later the Broncos took Duff; the model saw the tight end run coming.
The case ▸The case ▾
The board made this pick, not the need chart — consensus puts Duff outside the top 100, the model says 227th, and the model is doing the picking. The board's best player outranks a needs list that starts with the secondary. The simulator lands here in 27 percent of runs — a modest edge on an open board. The run was already on — the Buccaneers took Robinson one pick earlier.
The case ▸The case ▾
Robinson at No. 21 is the value of the round on paper — consensus has him 12th. The model is cooler, 32nd on our board, which is exactly why he is still here. The pick shows up in 19 percent of simulator runs, a genuinely open slot.
The case ▸The case ▾
You will not find Baugh this high in other mocks — consensus says outside the top 50. The model disagrees, 23rd on our board, and the board's best player outranks a needs list that starts with the secondary. The simulator lands here in 17 percent of runs — a genuinely open slot.
The case ▸The case ▾
The board made this pick, not the need chart — consensus puts Carter outside the top 70, the model says 52nd, and the model is doing the picking. The playmaker corps is a genuine need for the Lions.
The case ▸The case ▾
The model is planting a flag: it ranks Marsh 36th while consensus has him outside the top 40. Call it a reach if you like, but the board's best player outranks a needs list that starts with the offensive line. The simulator lands here in 9 percent of runs — a genuinely open slot.
The case ▸The case ▾
The model disagrees, 194th on our board, and the playmaker corps is a genuine need for the Patriots. The run was already on — the Chargers took Marsh one pick earlier.
The case ▸The case ▾
The front seven is the roster's biggest hole; Viliamu-Asa answers it without a reach — No. 12 on the model's board. The model is higher on him than the market, 12th against a consensus 34th.
The case ▸The case ▾
Goosby at No. 27 is the value of the round on paper — consensus has him ninth. The model is cooler, third on our board, which is exactly why he is still here.
The case ▸The case ▾
The model disagrees, 49th on our board, and the playmaker corps is the roster's biggest hole.
The case ▸The case ▾
The board made this pick, not the need chart — consensus puts Rhodes outside the top 50, the model says 31st, and the model is doing the picking. The front seven is a genuine need for the Ravens.
The case ▸The case ▾
Wilson is the pick because the front seven is a genuine need for the Seahawks, and the board cooperates: he is the model's No. 53 player. Consensus is actually higher on him than the model (30th to 53rd), which makes the price at No. 30 easy.
The case ▸The case ▾
The model disagrees, 38th on our board, and the secondary is the bigger hole, but the model will not pass on the board's best player to chase it.
The case ▸The case ▾
By consensus this is larceny: the market ranks Carr 24th overall and he is still on the board at No. 32. The model is the reason he lasted — it has him 57th, right around this slot — but at this price the argument makes itself.