Best Player Available

Discussion in 'Draft Zone' started by kenai, Apr 15, 2006.

  1. kenai

    kenai New Member

    77 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    The thing I like most about the Davis signing is that it allows us to draft the Best Player Available. And that will be a change! Seems like Jerry always falls in love with a player at a key position of need...and sometimes, we reach (Quincy Carter, Tony Dixon...etc.). So, wouldn't it be refreshing if we just drafted the very best player--at any position?

    And please don't give me a lecture about a FS to compete with Davis. That is obvious. But there are still some FA FSs available (Coleman) and there will be FSs cut after the draft and in the preseason.

    Best Player Available! Any position! Go get him!
  2. ka0tik

    ka0tik Cowboy for Life

    3,920 Messages
    1,311 Likes Received
    mm yeah I know wut ur gettin @. but lets say u already have a GREAT PLAYER @ that position? [ NOt talking about FS ] I guess, u take him 2 great players is always good in same position, depth!
  3. AbeBeta

    AbeBeta Well-Known Member

    28,564 Messages
    3,117 Likes Received
    for the last time. a team that lets Keith Davis dictate their draft has their heads up their butts. here or not, Davis shouldn't impact any of our picks
  4. kenai

    kenai New Member

    77 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Ah, you are so wise! Yes, we should abandon the strategy of trying to get good players and just draft Davis's replacement. Ah, yes, such profound wisdom, and I'm thankful to receive it for "the last time" :rolleyes:
  5. NorTex

    NorTex Well-Known Member

    1,078 Messages
    93 Likes Received
    So are you saying that Davis should be our starter? Or are you saying that a FA should be our starter. Or are you saying that we should draft a FS to be our starter?
  6. MiStar

    MiStar New Member

    395 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    THe only thing that the Davis signing means is that we've got enough safeties that can play special teams.

    Davis was the worst player starting for the Cowboys who wasn't a kicker. Why would you not try to upgrade that position?

    The whole idea of BPA is ********. Let's go draft someone who would be a great fit on another team. Great Idea...
  7. TheHustler

    TheHustler Active Member

    5,392 Messages
    1 Likes Received
    When you draft for need you draft players like Shante Carver and Eb Ekuban.
  8. Clove

    Clove Shrinkage

    47,261 Messages
    8,220 Likes Received
    I do agree on the BPA system. I think it should be, what ever you need, draft the BPA for your needs. But we need a really good safety, and if the guy is too slow, don't even think about it. We need someone who can cover ground fast.
  9. blindzebra

    blindzebra Well-Known Member

    10,410 Messages
    1,938 Likes Received
    BPA is a myth.

    You have to draft for needs, the key is getting value and not reaching for those needs.

    But nobody takes a player early in the draft when they have a franchise player in that position and depth behind them.

    If you take BPA literally you could end up taking 7 RBs in a draft if fate just happens to put a RB as the top player on your board when you pick.
  10. burmafrd

    burmafrd Benched

    43,820 Messages
    3,379 Likes Received
    BPA stupidity is best illustrated by Detroit and their WR mess.
    Need stupidity is pretty well illustrated by us and our need for a replacement for Haley that led to JJ going for DE's that busted.
    Ya gotta mix the two and do it right and it ain't easy.
    RIGHT now we do not draft a SS or a TE for sure since we have Pro Bowlers there. We do not REACH for a FS or a OT though we do have needs there.
    At any single draft position there are probably 6-8 players that are legitimate at that spot- all about the same ability. What you do there is then from that pool draft the one that you think will help your team the most.
  11. MichaelWinicki

    MichaelWinicki "You want some?" Staff Member

    41,073 Messages
    13,285 Likes Received


    I thought this thread was inhabited by short bus riders until I got to your post which was nice to see amongst the rest.
  12. dbair1967

    dbair1967 Arch Defender

    30,783 Messages
    1 Likes Received
    if you mean worst DEFENSIVE starting player, ok...but the worst players on the team last yr were the RT (Petitti) the LT (Tucker) and the usual starting C (Johnson)

    and it wasnt even close

  13. burmafrd

    burmafrd Benched

    43,820 Messages
    3,379 Likes Received
    Have to give the award to Tucker hands down. He was not a rookie like Pettiti; he also did not have the physical problems pettiti had; Davis played great on ST and was so-so to average as a FS. With some big mistakes.
  14. MichaelWinicki

    MichaelWinicki "You want some?" Staff Member

    41,073 Messages
    13,285 Likes Received
    I would agree with that.

    But quite frankly Campbell wasn't far behind.
  15. david_jackson

    david_jackson New Member

    198 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    "The whole idea of BPA is ********" a cogent arguement if ever I heard one;)
  16. AbeBeta

    AbeBeta Well-Known Member

    28,564 Messages
    3,117 Likes Received
    You might work a little on your reading comprehension before you reply to posts. My comment was Davis had no impact on how we were going to pick.
  17. kenai

    kenai New Member

    77 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Picking the extreme example (7 RBs) is sort of ridiculous. For years in the 70's the Boy's got to the superbowl by choosing the BPA. If he worked out, great, if not, then oh well. But, if he did work out, they traded the other player for future picks and rolled seamlessly on. There weren't gaps while they were waiting for the next good player just because their "need" draft pick flopped.

    Take an example that involved trades: SF had Montana. Why get another good QB when you have Montana? Well, they traded for Steve Young, groomed him behind Montana and then eventually traded Montana. A good young player can force a good old player out but while he still has trade value.

    So, if we skip the BPA and draft to simply for need we're short-sighted. If we had a chance to draft Vernon Davis at TE we should grab it. If he works out then you have a new 2TE/2WR offense that is strong in run blocking and still spreads the field. Still not satisfied? Well, then trade one of them.

    Who here is going to say that Buffalo shouldn't have drafted McGahee because they had Henry? Well, McGahee worked out and they traded Henry and everyone in Buffalo seems pretty happy with it.

    The point is that when you have a chance to acquire a potentially great player at a reasonable price then do it. It isn't worth picking strictly for need (Quincy C) when a player like Sean Rogers is sitting there.

    Now, later in the draft things even out. You aren't going to find that sure fine difference maker (at least you don't know that you will). If he were there, you would have drafted him earlier. So, sure, you pick more for need because the difference between players is slighter.
  18. Eskimo

    Eskimo Well-Known Member

    12,821 Messages
    496 Likes Received
    Anytime you can get a franchise type player at any position, just pick them and work out how and where to play them later. You just don't pass on guys like Ronnie Lott even if you have Roy Williams on the roster already. The best examples I can think of for this year are if players like Ngata, Winston Justice or Vernon Davis fall to us - we already have good quality starters at those postions but each would represent top-10 talents that fell to #18.

    Having said that, there is a delicate balance to be reached between BPA, the schemes you run (you may adjust some of your schemes to accomodate for a great player's strengths and weaknesses) and your needs.

    Focusing too much on any one of these aspects will lead to misses.

    Of course, none of this matters if your scouting or coaching is poor.
  19. big dog cowboy

    big dog cowboy THE BIG DOG Staff Member

    67,269 Messages
    22,510 Likes Received
    Actually, I don't think the signing of Davis has any inpact on our draft on day one at all.
  20. neosapien23

    neosapien23 Well-Known Member

    2,875 Messages
    122 Likes Received
    I know alot of fans want Carpenter at 18, but Comartie might still be there at 18. I think Comartie is a much better long term prospect. Before his injury, he was being compared to Champ Baily. Comartie might just be the surprise pick of the draft at 18, and Henry would be moved to FS.

Share This Page