Best Player Available vs. Draft for Needs

[CowboyDan]

For me it's best available, or trade out of that spot. It never makes sense to me to reach just to fill a need. Free Agency and trades allow you to fill needs if you don't get what you need in the draft. And what's the success rate of a rookie coming in and filling a need well? What do you prefer?

 

[YosemiteSam]

For me it's best available, or trade out of that spot. It never makes sense to me to reach just to fill a need. Free Agency and trades allow you to fill needs if you don't get what you need in the draft. And what's the success rate of a rookie coming in and filling a need well? What do you prefer?

 

[CowboyDan]

So appropriate, because YOU ARE THE CHARLIE SHEEN OF COWBOYSZONE!

 

[zrinkill]

So appropriate, because YOU ARE THE CHARLIE SHEEN OF COWBOYSZONE!

So if you put him Bob and R2A together it would be two and a half men.

I kid I kid.

 

[laythewood28]

You take the best player available player that is needed.

 

[Duane]

You take the best player available player that is needed.

You do in the 1st round anyway because of the money involved.

 

[Doomsday101]

For me it's best available, or trade out of that spot. It never makes sense to me to reach just to fill a need. Free Agency and trades allow you to fill needs if you don't get what you need in the draft. And what's the success rate of a rookie coming in and filling a need well? What do you prefer?

I think both have to play a part in the pick. I don't like seeing us reach for a player because we have a need. However If say at our pick at 9 the 9 BPA is a TE, the 10 BPA is a RB and the 11th is an OT well for me the need has to play a part even though I have 2 guys rated slightly ahead.

 

[YosemiteSam]

So appropriate, because YOU ARE THE CHARLIE SHEEN OF COWBOYSZONE!

When I was around 24 I damn well could have been rofl.

 

[DFWJC]

BPA within reason.

And BPA is based on your system and standards, not anyone elses.

QB seems to be the exception even for the most stirct BPA drafters.
If you have no QB and your turn comes up anf your board has 2-3 players slightly ahead of a QB that you expect to be a star anyway, you take him.

That applies to the other positions too, but much less so.

Bottomline is if you fill your roster with the very best players--ones you feel can play a long time in the NFL--you will come out ahead of some team force feeding lesser players into slots to fill needs. Players get hurt or become free agents. Pittsburgh, for example, drafts very forward-looking.

It's best to draft looking forward at least as much as the very near term. That says, take the very best players you can.

Just like said. If the value does not match your needs then try to trade up or down to make them match.

 

[laythewood28]

I think both have to play a part in the pick. I don't like seeing us reach for a player because we have a need. However If say at our pick at 9 the 9 BPA is a TE, the 10 BPA is a RB and the 11th is an OT well for me the need has to play a part even though I have 2 guys rated slightly ahead.

That is pretty much it.

 

[Doomsday101]

That is pretty much it.

I feel that was the case with Quincy Carter, we needed a QB so we reached for a guy 1 to 2 rds before many felt he should have been selected.

 

[YosemiteSam]

I feel that was the case with Quincy Carter, we needed a QB so we reached for a guy 1 to 2 rds before many felt he should have been selected.

Damn, if you reach 2 full rounds for a guy; that ain't reaching; that's selling your soul for crap! :laugh2:

 

[JD_KaPow]

For me it's best available, or trade out of that spot. It never makes sense to me to reach just to fill a need.... What do you prefer?

In general, I agree.

First: if there's a player who fits a need and is clearly ranked higher than anyone else on your board, consider trading up.

Second: take BPA at your slot.

If BPA really doesn't fit a need (say it's a QB and you have a young franchise QB already), or you're confident that the BPA on your board will be around for a while, then:

Third: try to trade down to a spot where the BPA is more useful.

The problem comes in when you can't make that ideal trade down happen. Either there's no partner or you have to trade down too far to be assured of a player you like. That's when you either:

Four: draft the BPA even though he doesn't fit a need, or
Five: reach for the best player who does fit your need.

I think that pretty much sums it up.

 

[Doomsday101]

Damn, if you reach 2 full rounds for a guy; that ain't reaching; that's selling your soul for crap! :laugh2:

Your right we sold our soul for crap and paid for it.

 

[CowboyDan]

I think both have to play a part in the pick. I don't like seeing us reach for a player because we have a need. However If say at our pick at 9 the 9 BPA is a TE, the 10 BPA is a RB and the 11th is an OT well for me the need has to play a part even though I have 2 guys rated slightly ahead.

I agree, but that's not exactly a reach. I'm talking about drafting a QB at 9 that is ranked as the 20th best player just because you need a qb.

 

[Duane]

I agree, but that's not exactly a reach. I'm talking about drafting a QB at 9 that is ranked as the 20th best player just because you need a qb.

In that case you trade down and take the extra draft picks.

 

[nathanlt]

It's always a mix...

BPA that happens to meet a need. Yakuza has some meaningful thoughts on it, check out that thread.

There are times when you draft to build on a strength, because the BPA is so talented. A great example of this was drafting Roy Williams alongside Darren Woodson. Safety wasn't a huge need, but it became a point of strength on the defense. That defense was definitely fun to watch.

Building a powerhouse running game with BPA when your defense is average is not a bad idea, to keep opposing teams offense on the sidelines for a majority of the game. Of course, that philosophy ignores a need, but creates new needs on offense.

No matter how you slice it, you'll ALWAYS mix a little bit of both. You will always look at BPA, but if that DL is the BPA in a 4-3, and would not translate well to a 3-4, you're not doing yourself any favors by selecting an incompatible player in your system. What good is talent if it the player is out of position and cannot use it?

 

[Doomsday101]

I agree, but that's not exactly a reach. I'm talking about drafting a QB at 9 that is ranked as the 20th best player just because you need a qb.

I agree. Just saying I think both need and BPA have to be looked at. I will say the one exception I would have is for a player I truely believe will be a franchise player. Had Luck came out this year even though QB is not a big need I would not pass on him if the chance came. I think ever so often a player comes out that you feel is head and shoulders above the others and you have a chance to get him you do it.