Dispelling draft "wisdom" Best player available

[nathanlt]

The truth is, that if Dallas thought that a TE was just barely better than a 1st round OT, their need in that spot is obvious, and they would not simply choose TE like a robot, instead of OT. Some might say they should, because... "Best player available!"

Next, in the second round, let's say that a solid TE just edged out their top RB bruiser of a prospect, an area of need most certainly.... What? Since we have one threatening TE, and 3 developmental TE's Dallas would somehow take the Best player available??? No way.

So, in reality, when trade-downs are NOT an option, teams reach, filling a need, but trusting their scouting department along the way. They might and SHOULD select the best player at any position of need, a player that is not expected to fall to the next pick.

What positions would be a wasted pick in this draft? Obviously, I think TE is more than covered for the upcoming season.
Unless Parsons is permanently moved back to LB, I don't think the Cowboys should go for an LB, with Overshown coming back.
Diggs and Bland are solid at CB, I don't think the early rounds should get a CB, either.
QB would be especially puzzling, since Cooper Rush is one of the most reliable and results driven backup QBs in the league, and a 4th round pick was just used on Trey Lance.

So, for this draft, the wisdom of "Best Player Available" has a huge asterisk... it's not really how to operate.

 

[Gambit]

Unless Parsons is permanently moved back to LB, I don't think the Cowboys should go for an LB, with Overshown coming back.

1. Overshown will be returning from a ACL injury

2. lVE may retire

3. We only have Clark as a true LB if LVE leaves.

LB especially ones that fit the mold of current DC is a need.

Diggs and Bland are solid at CB, I don't think the early rounds should get a CB, either.

1. Diggs is returning from an ACL
2. If we lose both Gilly and Lewis we are razor thin at CB.

CB is a need. They visited with some of the top CBs at combine I expect they are targeting one early

On TE if Bowers is there you have to think very long and hard on passing up on him. And who knows he may slip

 

[Hardline]

It's best to go BPA in the draft and fill your needs in free agency. It's stupid to pass on superior talent to reach for a need.

 

[Malhavoc]

It's best to go BPA in the draft and fill your needs in free agency. It's stupid to pass on superior talent to reach for a need.

Always been the problem with this team. The don’t do enough in FA, and even when they draft well they still have holes. IMO you draft from the strength of the class if possible. For me, that means OL and WR. If Bowers drops, that changes things. If Murphy drops I would seriously consider him. There isn‘t a LB I would take in round 1.

 

[Smith22]

Unless Parsons is permanently moved back to LB, I don't think the Cowboys should go for an LB, with Overshown coming back.

The lack of size and playmakers, particularly in the middle of the defense, was a huge problem last season.

Upgrading at LB should be a huge priority along with center as well.

Corner could be a need if Lewis and Gilmore leave.

 

[StuckMojo]

Definitely need help at LB. At CB, Diggs is coming back from injury and Gilmore getting slower.

 

[America's Cowboy]

You draft BPA at your positions of need. If not, you will still have voids at your positions of need. Very simple to understand.

 

[Creeper]

I think BPA strategy is more nuanced than simply taking the best player available. All teams will include need in the equation. Plus they will weigh the value of positions. Unless the best player is a far superior talent, or a generational player, need has to be included. A great example is teams with franchise QBs will pass on potential franchise QBs in the draft.

Dallas has a lot of needs this year. DL, LB, RB, OL, and possibly WR. For them, taking the player with the most potential impact on the team would be a very good strategy.

 

[DFWJC]

The truth is, that if Dallas thought that a TE was just barely better than a 1st round OT, their need in that spot is obvious, and they would not simply choose TE like a robot, instead of OT. Some might say they should, because... "Best player available!"

Next, in the second round, let's say that a solid TE just edged out their top RB bruiser of a prospect, an area of need most certainly.... What? Since we have one threatening TE, and 3 developmental TE's Dallas would somehow take the Best player available??? No way.

So, in reality, when trade-downs are NOT an option, teams reach, filling a need, but trusting their scouting department along the way. They might and SHOULD select the best player at any position of need, a player that is not expected to fall to the next pick.

What positions would be a wasted pick in this draft? Obviously, I think TE is more than covered for the upcoming season.
Unless Parsons is permanently moved back to LB, I don't think the Cowboys should go for an LB, with Overshown coming back.
Diggs and Bland are solid at CB, I don't think the early rounds should get a CB, either.
QB would be especially puzzling, since Cooper Rush is one of the most reliable and results driven backup QBs in the league, and a 4th round pick was just used on Trey Lance.

So, for this draft, the wisdom of "Best Player Available" has a huge asterisk... it's not really how to operate.

BPA in tiers, not in absolutes

"Barely" means same tier

Tiers of players will have multiple positions. From there you select by need....or trade

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

I think BPA strategy is more nuanced than simply taking the best player available. All teams will include need in the equation. Plus they will weigh the value of positions. Unless the best player is a far superior talent, or a generational player, need has to be included. A great example is teams with franchise QBs will pass on potential franchise QBs in the draft.

Dallas has a lot of needs this year. DL, LB, RB, OL, and possibly WR. For them, taking the player with the most potential impact on the team would be a very good strategy.

I agree mostly with this, but I think you have to draft for year 2, 3, 4. Drafting for a need right now is an unrealistic expectation on that rookie.

LB, for instance. You bring one in and he’s not ready, that in no way means it was a busted pick; he could be awesome by year 3. But in between then you have to pick up a couple strong LBers through FA or a trade to fill out the roster, and now you don’t need that 1st rounder years 2 or 3. However, you know in a couple years both Cooks and Gallup will be gone. So even though a WR today may get limited playing time, you’re going to need him in 2025.

Not saying it will happen like that or PB then is not a priority, but that’s the stuff you have to think about. Never draft for today, every prospect isn’t gonna be rookie Micah Parsons or Ezekiel Elliot

 

[cnuball21]

If you take care of big needs in FA you can draft the best player. We suck at this so we tend to draft for need…which is not good.

 

[Creeper]

I agree mostly with this, but I think you have to draft for year 2, 3, 4. Drafting for a need right now is an unrealistic expectation on that rookie.

LB, for instance. You bring one in and he’s not ready, that in no way means it was a busted pick; he could be awesome by year 3. But in between then you might pick up a couple strong LBers through FA or a trade and suddenly you didn’t need that 1st rounder year 1, and now you don’t need that 1st rounder years 2 or 3. However, you know in a couple years both Cooks and Gallup will be gone. So even though a WR today may get limited playing time, you’re going to need him in 2025.

Every rookie is a risk. But rookies can contribute in year one as we saw with Green Bay. But my point is not that they will contribute but that they have the best potential to contribute. They cannot draft players early who will it behind players they already have. With all the weaknesses Dallas has they can draft the best player at any number of positions and probably come out a better team in the end.

 

[beware_d-ware]

BPA and need are both more of a skew than an ironclad strategy. Every team factors in both their big board rankings and their team needs when they're on the clock... the question is which one do they tend to favor when things get close.

Personally, I am a BPA guy. The Cowboys are usually need drafters, but for some reason, they went mega-chalky in 2020 and basically drafted the highest rated players at every pick.. The results were CeeDee, Diggs, Gallimore, and Biadasz. I'd like to see more drafts like that.

 

[nathanlt]

I agree mostly with this, but I think you have to draft for year 2, 3, 4. Drafting for a need right now is an unrealistic expectation on that rookie.

LB, for instance. You bring one in and he’s not ready, that in no way means it was a busted pick; he could be awesome by year 3. But in between then you have to pick up a couple strong LBers through FA or a trade to fill out the roster, and now you don’t need that 1st rounder years 2 or 3. However, you know in a couple years both Cooks and Gallup will be gone. So even though a WR today may get limited playing time, you’re going to need him in 2025.

Not saying it will happen like that or PB then is not a priority, but that’s the stuff you have to think about. Never draft for today, every prospect isn’t gonna be rookie Micah Parsons or Ezekiel Elliot

Good points.. I think that letting LT go unfilled in the early rounds could be devastating... ( I would prefer a quality guard that kicks Tyler Smith out to LT, myself... because known quantity with Tyler) Dallas is so lucky that they have TJ Bass. 2nd year could be a big jump, and Tyler would be moved to LT just fine. If the Cowboys don't pick an LT in the early rounds, it means they think as highly of TJ Bass as I do.

However, Steele should very likely be replaced, so Dallas should get an OT no matter what.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

Good points.. I think that letting LT go unfilled in the early rounds could be devastating... ( I would prefer a quality guard that kicks Tyler Smith out to LT, myself... because known quantity with Tyler) Dallas is so lucky that they have TJ Bass. 2nd year could be a big jump, and Tyler would be moved to LT just fine. If the Cowboys don't pick an LT in the early rounds, it means they think as highly of TJ Bass as I do.

However, Steele should very likely be replaced, so Dallas should get an OT no matter what.

Replaced this year? Martin and Tyler the only holdovers?

 

[nathanlt]

Replaced this year? Martin and Tyler the only holdovers?

Yes, his replacement should be drafted, and Bass/ Richards/Hoffman can continue to be backups until proven otherwise. Bass I think will crack the starting lineup first. If Steele hangs on, then that's because he was good enough. That's fine, too.

 

[cnuball21]

I agree mostly with this, but I think you have to draft for year 2, 3, 4. Drafting for a need right now is an unrealistic expectation on that rookie.

LB, for instance. You bring one in and he’s not ready, that in no way means it was a busted pick; he could be awesome by year 3. But in between then you have to pick up a couple strong LBers through FA or a trade to fill out the roster, and now you don’t need that 1st rounder years 2 or 3. However, you know in a couple years both Cooks and Gallup will be gone. So even though a WR today may get limited playing time, you’re going to need him in 2025.

Not saying it will happen like that or PB then is not a priority, but that’s the stuff you have to think about. Never draft for today, every prospect isn’t gonna be rookie Micah Parsons or Ezekiel Elliot

Good point and another reason to lean towards talent over need.

Expectations for rookies and prospects on this board blows my mind.

 

[nathanlt]

Good point and another reason to lean towards talent over need.

Expectations for rookies and prospects on this board blows my mind.

Yes, I think that is a fair point, and that's why I made this post to start with. What position do you think takes the longest to develop into a reliable starter, say 80% developed into of the players prime year in the league?

 

[tyke1doe]

I agree mostly with this, but I think you have to draft for year 2, 3, 4. Drafting for a need right now is an unrealistic expectation on that rookie.

LB, for instance. You bring one in and he’s not ready, that in no way means it was a busted pick; he could be awesome by year 3. But in between then you have to pick up a couple strong LBers through FA or a trade to fill out the roster, and now you don’t need that 1st rounder years 2 or 3. However, you know in a couple years both Cooks and Gallup will be gone. So even though a WR today may get limited playing time, you’re going to need him in 2025.

Not saying it will happen like that or PB then is not a priority, but that’s the stuff you have to think about. Never draft for today, every prospect isn’t gonna be rookie Micah Parsons or Ezekiel Elliot

PB?
Did you mean LB?

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

PB?
Did you mean LB?

I wrote that 6 hours ago Tyke, how would I be able to remember something like that