PDA

View Full Version : Lets hash this out.


HEISMANHERSCHEL
04-23-2008, 10:47 PM
The draft question-Best player or need?

I have been roving around the team sites, as draft weekend is approaching.

I have several friends coming over for the draft, and everyone talks about needs.

I seem to be in the minority, in that I think most of the time it is better for a team to draft best player available. The only time I would disagree (and even then, I have reservations) is when a team can legitamately compete for the superbowl. When I say that, I am talking about a team that is widely regarded as a top team in their respective conference.

Generally, I think a team is better off taking the best player available. Here is MY logic:

1)-In a few years if you draft best player available, you have a tradeable commodity.

2)-A team can always use a good player, even if it is not a position of need.

3)-No one can tell who might get injured throughout a season.

There are more arguements, and I would like to hear them. For my favorite team, drafting for need has not worked out well (Carpenter, Spears, ect.)


So...can I get some opinions? Is drafting for need overrated?????

DiG
04-23-2008, 10:52 PM
personally i am more fond of taking BPA to an extent. theres alway a couple positions on most teams where you just dont consider drafting. but as a hole im more for bpa.

RaiderFan
04-23-2008, 11:02 PM
BPA all the way
thats why i want McFadden

Brothgar
04-23-2008, 11:06 PM
It is always a mixture of philosophies IMHO. I say you take the player that is most better than the one you've got starting at the position the prospect is playing.

adschofield
04-23-2008, 11:14 PM
I go subscribe to the Hybird philosophy where you draft the BPA that fits your top 5 needs

The Dynasty
04-23-2008, 11:17 PM
Best Player on the First day then Address needs.

JagHombre22
04-23-2008, 11:17 PM
BPA....if you need a CB and DRC is available but DMAC is also there....you have to take DMAC...

Brothgar
04-23-2008, 11:19 PM
BPA....if you need a CB and DRC is available but DMAC is also there....you have to take DMAC...

Not if you have LT already on your team.

HEISMANHERSCHEL
04-23-2008, 11:20 PM
Okay, LT is the exception. I might admit that.

The Dynasty
04-23-2008, 11:24 PM
I heard there is a rumor that the Chargers might take a RB to replace Turner in the first round like a week ago but I havent heard anything since so I dont know.

I say if your sitting there with McFadden there and You have LT you still take him, That would be a Sick Duo. So I still say BPA on Day One.

Flyboy
04-23-2008, 11:25 PM
BPA has always been the theory I went by, but to a certain extent.

cordscords
04-23-2008, 11:31 PM
I go subscribe to the Hybird philosophy where you draft the BPA that fits your top 5 needs

Yup. BPA might be a CB, but that might be top need #4. It's still a need, so fill it with the BPA.

diabsoule
04-23-2008, 11:33 PM
I go by the hybrid theory as described above.

Brothgar
04-23-2008, 11:34 PM
I heard there is a rumor that the Chargers might take a RB to replace Turner in the first round like a week ago but I havent heard anything since so I dont know.

I say if your sitting there with McFadden there and You have LT you still take him, That would be a Sick Duo. So I still say BPA on Day One.

Mr. Millen is that you?

Hawk
04-23-2008, 11:35 PM
I don't think you can go with either one PERMANENTLY. Say McFadden falls to where the Vikings are. He would obviously be the BPA, but there's no way that they should pick him.

Say D-Mac is there at 7 for the Pats(with no dire needs), then they would be crazy not to take him.

It really depends on who you think you can take later to fill a need. The Packers took Harrell last year when most people wanted a TE or RB. But it all was good in Cheesetown.

Picking by need is by far the riskier drafting technique.

yodabear
04-23-2008, 11:36 PM
Well, since the BPA in this draft IMO is Darren McFadden, and now the Rams can have any1 not named Jake Long, we should take him then? **** no, thats moronic. We are a 3-13 team with a tremendous running back, and we have a defense that ranks near the bottom every year, so we got to go defense. I'm a needy guy. That sounds ****** up.

JagHombre22
04-23-2008, 11:37 PM
Mr. Millen is that you?

you can not pass on DMAC even if you have LT...this is a two back league now...LT is more of a physical runner DMAC is the more finesse runner...they would compliment each other well, IMO.

adschofield
04-23-2008, 11:37 PM
I go by the hybrid theory as described above.

Victory is mine..I have diab on my side

kalbears13
04-23-2008, 11:42 PM
you can not pass on DMAC even if you have LT...this is a two back league now...LT is more of a physical runner DMAC is the more finesse runner...they would compliment each other well, IMO.

I always thought LT was a quick guy who usually avoided contact instead of getting that extra yard. I dont think LT is a physical guy.

JagHombre22
04-23-2008, 11:44 PM
I always thought LT was a quick guy who usually avoided contact instead of getting that extra yard. I dont think LT is a physical guy.

I guess I meant to say more between the tackles...they'd still be a badass duo...

thebow305
04-23-2008, 11:55 PM
Drafting BPA worked out for Minnesota last year with AD, but drafting for Need helped out Cleveland very well with Thomas as well. It's a crap shoot, just do what you feel is best for YOUR team and hopefully everything will turn out alright. That's all you can really do, and pray.

Brothgar
04-23-2008, 11:57 PM
you can not pass on DMAC even if you have LT...this is a two back league now...LT is more of a physical runner DMAC is the more finesse runner...they would compliment each other well, IMO.
Yeah then you run smack dab in the problem that Matt Millen is in right now. You ignored your needs for "The BPA" lets not kid ourselves popular opinion at the time was that Charles Rogers, Mike Williams, Roy Williams and Calvin Johnson were BPA. Two busted now you have 2 WRs making truck loads of money and you can't afford them both. Imagine that with a RB. You have LT and DMAC both commanding a huge chunk of your cap space. You are boned at the rest of your positions. That is why you use the Hybrid approach the player that improves your team the most. Yes you do get that rare Michael Jordan, Sam Bowie situation and you lose out using the safe method.

LonghornsLegend
04-24-2008, 12:04 AM
BPA doesn't always work...For instance, McFadden could of been the BPA for Miami, yet that pick wouldnt make sense...I can go down the list of teams who have been taking skill positions at pretty positions, yet dont address the trenches, and you never even reap the benefits of those picks...So that BPA strategy has to come with a disclaimer...


Also certain picks have a premium and others dont, its easy to find a RB, so even though McFadden might be your BPA, do you take him over say a Dorsey, since impact DT's are much harder to come by? Of course not, you have to use a little bit of need into your BPA theory for it to make sense.

HEISMANHERSCHEL
04-24-2008, 12:13 AM
Yeah then you run smack dab in the problem that Matt Millen is in right now. You ignored your needs for "The BPA" lets not kid ourselves popular opinion at the time was that Charles Rogers, Mike Williams, Roy Williams and Calvin Johnson were BPA. Two busted now you have 2 WRs making truck loads of money and you can't afford them both. Imagine that with a RB. You have LT and DMAC both commanding a huge chunk of your cap space. You are boned at the rest of your positions. That is why you use the Hybrid approach the player that improves your team the most. Yes you do get that rare Michael Jordan, Sam Bowie situation and you lose out using the safe method.

I am not trying to be a jerk here, I promise. But...

What if you are in, "That rare Michael Jordan, Sam Bowie situation..."

If you miss out on Michael Jordan, people are still talking about it 25 years later...Thats all I'm sayin...people know who drafted Michael Jordan. What everyone wants to know 25 years later is, "Who passed on him."

25 years is a long time. I would agree there are exceptions to every rule. But if you are trying to justify taking a need player over best player, I would not bring up Michael Jordan. Thats all I'm sayin...

Brothgar
04-24-2008, 12:29 AM
I am not trying to be a jerk here, I promise. But...

What if you are in, "That rare Michael Jordan, Sam Bowie situation..."

If you miss out on Michael Jordan, people are still talking about it 25 years later...Thats all I'm sayin...people know who drafted Michael Jordan. What everyone wants to know 25 years later is, "Who passed on him."

25 years is a long time. I would agree there are exceptions to every rule. But if you are trying to justify taking a need player over best player, I would not bring up Michael Jordan. Thats all I'm sayin...

Yeah if I was trying to win the argument that I didn't believe in then yeah I'd keep out the Jordan situation. But I believe in the method where you always pick the best improvement to your starting lineup. The Jordan scenario is the only one where the method breaks down. We have Clyde Drexler
(who is also a HOF player BTW) so lets pass on MJ. So yeah Sam Bowie may suck in comparison to MJ but what would MJ do sitting on the bench behinde Clyde Drexler for the first 4/5 years of his career?

kalbears13
04-24-2008, 12:32 AM
Drafting BPA worked out for Minnesota last year with AD, but drafting for Need helped out Cleveland very well with Thomas as well. It's a crap shoot, just do what you feel is best for YOUR team and hopefully everything will turn out alright. That's all you can really do, and pray.

Joe Thomas wasn't just a need. He was probably one of the BPA. When you look at any prospect you're always going to look at both need and their skill. There aren't many instances where someone drafts someone purely one way or the other.

HEISMANHERSCHEL
04-24-2008, 12:42 AM
Michael Jordan does not sit behind Clyde Drexler. Not on any team. Not in any way.

But I see what you mean. There is a point in drafting the player that best improves your team. I agree, totally. However, I would say the time when this is important is when a team is a true superbowl competitor. If you are not an elite team, I would say "Draft Best Player."

For instance-a certain team none expects to be in the superbowl (maybe the vikings last year, off the top of my head) takes best player. Does anyone blame the Vikings for taking Peterson? They could have had Brady Quinn!!! I would have drafted Peterson in a second. In hindsight, I would have drafted Peterson over Quinn, even though personally I think Quinn is more of an upgrade over Tavaris Jackson than Peterson is over Taylor.

This may not be a completely fair arguement. However, teams that take a better player (in my estimation) cant go wrong. Exceptions to every rule, I understand. But I would say it better be a good exception.

LonghornsLegend
04-24-2008, 12:42 AM
Also MJ wasn't looked at in the same light going into that draft as Lebron James was, or as a "cant miss prospect" that you had to have...He was highly touted, but its a big difference between highly touted, and everyone knowing he would be great...Bowie was the right pick at the time it just didn't turn out that way, it doesn't make it the wrong pick because it didn't turn out right.

HEISMANHERSCHEL
04-24-2008, 12:49 AM
Also MJ wasn't looked at in the same light going into that draft as Lebron James was, or as a "cant miss prospect" that you had to have...He was highly touted, but its a big difference between highly touted, and everyone knowing he would be great...Bowie was the right pick at the time it just didn't turn out that way, it doesn't make it the wrong pick because it didn't turn out right.

Okay, this I will admit...and this is a good point. No one could have seen what was coming, and I will concede this point...

I guess my point is, all things being equal, isn't it a good idea to draft best player???? Can anyone give an example of when Best Player Available backfired without using hindsight?

Once again, not trying to argue. I am just at a loss trying to find a time when BPA is a bad idea (unless you are looking for the one missing piece for a superbowl.)

Shiver
04-24-2008, 01:15 AM
This topic has been hashed and rehashed, and I think it is irrelevant in the first place. The term "B.P.A" is an arbitrary term. Who has the clout to make these determinations as to which players will be the 'best' for these teams? Is it the media, fans, NFL consensus?

Geo
04-24-2008, 01:33 AM
I think the way to look at it is that there is position-specific value and team-specific need to serve as the tie-breakers, or adjusters, between BPA candidates. Who are in all likelihood closely rated.

duckseason
04-24-2008, 02:15 AM
I was about to make an unnecessarily long-winded post on the subject, but then I got to the end of the thread and realized that the last two posts summarize my thoughts on the subject pretty well.

This topic has been hashed and rehashed, and I think it is irrelevant in the first place. The term "B.P.A" is an arbitrary term. Who has the clout to make these determinations as to which players will be the 'best' for these teams? Is it the media, fans, NFL consensus?

I think the way to look at it is that there is position-specific value and team-specific need to serve as the tie-breakers, or adjusters, between BPA candidates. Who are in all likelihood closely rated.

Pretty much all that needs to be said, imo.

Bengalsrocket
04-24-2008, 03:29 AM
As an NFL team you pretty much have to make a list and say who is the best player in the draft, second best, third best - etc.

Then you when you draft you skip over positions you're "set" on and don't want to load a bunch of money into if you already have a starter there. For example, lets say Matt Ryan is around @ number 9- cincinnati is not going to draft him even if they valued him as the number 1 player in the draft (calm down, its hypothetical example :) ) because we already have Carson Palmer - If we have room on the depth chart and need to add a quarterback, we'll do it in round 7.

Another example: Chargers have LT - lets say they have the 5th overall pick. There not going to draft D-mac. it doesn't matter how much talent you think he has. Dolphins have ronnie brown and they didn't take D-mac for a reason. You cannot afford to pay LT and D-mac on that roster (I'm pretty sure they're close to salary cap already). THey would rather have a running back out of the 3rd or 4th round to be LT's compliment - less risk, less pay, probably close production (considering this halfback will only be getting the ball 1/3rd of the time that LT gets it).

This league is only a two-back league for the teams who don't have a ton of money tied up in QB's in WR's. Addai will probably never have as good of a compliment as Fred Taylor's Maurice-jones Drew because the colts pay peyton / wayne / harrison (and even gonzalez) a lot of money already.

But basically you take the best player available that can win the starting job (or so you think) over your current starter until the 4-7th round, in which point if you're not looking for starters, you draft for depth (which would be BPA really).