Do not draft for need take the best player

[hammer1]

I once believed in taking the BPA regardless of need, then I decided no. I was for it before I was against it.

Even if you're drafting for need...you're taking the BPA aren't you?

Who's not going to take the BPA at linebacker on their board...if linebacker is your need?

 

[CCBoy]

No team really goes BPA without taking into account need. Green Bay was looking for Favre's replacement and Rodgers fell to them. They knew they had time but they were going to take him if he fell and he did.

Matt millen is the perfect example of someone that could screw up a replacement of a light bulb. Blindly going BPA is just as stupid as going blindly for need.

Target on, burma, as even between relatively close player values, you still have a position consideration with that player. That aspect alone has to be projected into scheme and application of that players skill set. That determines a closer consideration of value at that pick, and it does involve positional considerations related to each specific player considered.

 

[TwoCentPlain]

I really don't think that will be an issue for the Cowboys this draft. With all the needs of the Cowboys, I'm sure the BPA will likely fill a need. Other than TE, and P, one could probably make a case of need for every other position. S (Ball, Sensabaugh), CB (Jenkins, Newman), LB (James, Spencer), DL (Olshansky, Spears, Hatcher) are all needs. OL (Davis, Colombo, Kosier, Gurode), RB (Barber, Choice?), WR (Williams?), QB (Kitna), FB, K.

The cowboys need to hit on at least 3-4 starters from this draft. And they have to stay healthy for the year.

 

[SDCowboy]

I don't get the negativity towards us drafting a top WR in this draft if Green should for some reason be there. Everyone wants Roy off the team but then has no answer for replacing him. We also have Dez for a relative song it's not like we can't afford to draft another top receiver.

 

[Fletch]

In other words, do not reach for any player because of need. if it means we take guys like A.J. Green or Julio Jones, so be it. i keep seeing people having the Cowboys reaching for a DE, OL and CB/S with the 9th pick. i say no! unless you can get Fairley or Darius at DE with the 9th pick. leave DE alone in the first round. and there is no O-Linemen in this draft worth the 9th pick. and unless you can ger P.Peterson. leave CB/S alone in the first round.If Green or Jones slide to 9th. we have to take either one, because they will be the best players on the board. we may be looking at another Bobby Carpenter, if we reach for a guy like J.J. Watt. and no O-Linemen should be taken 9th.PERIOD! TAKE THE BEST PLAYER JERRY.

Unfortunately BPA does not apply to a WR when it's time for Dallas to pick. Dallas is set at WR for at least a couple more seasons. If
Peterson is gone within the top 5, then we need to go O-line or DT. We cannot afford to miss out on a good player for the trenches.

 

[HoosierCowboy]

can't disregard need or you could end up with a QB every year--but I think we are good enough to take anyone but WR, TE, QB, or RB in rounds 1 or 2. I too would like to see us either trade up or down--9 is not really a good spot for us.

 

[Fletch]

can't disregard need or you could end up with a QB every year--but I think we are good enough to take anyone but WR, TE, QB, or RB in rounds 1 or 2. I too would like to see us either trade up or down--9 is not really a good spot for us.

Every year we hear that whatever spot we're currently in is not a good spot. I think we're okay. And I agree that we do not have a need in the higher rounds for WR, TE, QB, or RB. 1st three rounds need to be dedicated to OL, DL, CB, or FS.

 

[Jimz31]

BPA for a position of need/depth is what most every team does.....

If the BPA is a QB everytime your turn to draft pops up, you don't keep taking 5-7 QB's....

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

In other words, do not reach for any player because of need. if it means we take guys like A.J. Green or Julio Jones, so be it. i keep seeing people having the Cowboys reaching for a DE, OL and CB/S with the 9th pick. i say no! unless you can get Fairley or Darius at DE with the 9th pick. leave DE alone in the first round. and there is no O-Linemen in this draft worth the 9th pick. and unless you can ger P.Peterson. leave CB/S alone in the first round.If Green or Jones slide to 9th. we have to take either one, because they will be the best players on the board. we may be looking at another Bobby Carpenter, if we reach for a guy like J.J. Watt. and no O-Linemen should be taken 9th.PERIOD! TAKE THE BEST PLAYER JERRY.

I see we have another board member from Farmers Branch.
Yes, an intriguing notion: Do not pick for need, pick the best player.
You just might be onto something.
In my humble onion, you have just coined the phrase "Take the Best Player!
."

I salute you!

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Matt Millen is that u? Seriously tho, Tony wont have time to throw to anybody, if the oline keeps on decaying..

:laugh2:
Matt Millen, the new standard of substandardness!

You made me smile, and it aint easy smiling on a radio tower 300 feet above beautiful Farmers Branch trying to fix a coaxial fitter to the transmission bar of a flux capacitor.

 

[burmafrd]

IF you have no real needs then you can slant towards BPA along. Otherwise your needs will ALWAYS factor in on any pick you have.

 

[CCBoy]

IF you have no real needs then you can slant towards BPA along. Otherwise your needs will ALWAYS factor in on any pick you have.

burma, this is my story and I'm sticking to it...

Dallas will select one of these three players at number nine:

Bowers
Dareus
Fairley

Either that, or they receive a trade down that they just can NOT refuse...

 

[cowboyvic]

Interesting article in the Milwaukee paper this week on just this topic:

http://www.jsonline.com/packerinsider/118438259.html

It's about Ted Thompson's (Green Bay's GM) approach the draft. He is a strong believer in taking the best player available, irregardless of the position. They point to Aaron Rogers somehow falling from what people thought might be the #1 pick in the draft down to the 20s where Green Bay took him even though Favre had 3-5 more years in him.

Thompson's quote from the article on his 'draft the best player available' strategy was:

"We feel very strongly that our best policy is to try and draft the best player because you never know," Thompson said. "This whole drafting for need, this isn't fantasy football. As you can tell from our team this year, what you think you have at a position could go away with one sprained ankle or one bad knee."

​

Anyway, food for thought. Certainly has been working for GB.

Tompson is right. that is how you win championships. reaching for a Bobby Carpenter or a J.J. Watt will not win you any championships.PERIOD. get mad at me all you want. but i say the Cowboys should take the best player, instead of drafting for need.

 

[cowboyvic]

Unfortunately BPA does not apply to a WR when it's time for Dallas to pick. Dallas is set at WR for at least a couple more seasons. If
Peterson is gone within the top 5, then we need to go O-line or DT. We cannot afford to miss out on a good player for the trenches.

And that's why our team have won one playoff game in 15 years. reaching for need,instead of getting the best players.how do you think we end with the Bobby Carpenter's of the world? DONT REACH FOR NEED JERRY.

 

[realtick]

I haven't read all the posts in the thread, but I think the best approach is always taking the BPA at a position of need.

 

[hairic]

Should draft for greatest value.

Value should be a combination of player value, position value, team possessions, team needs, total amount of team needs, and most of the previous for every other team weighted by whatever successful math nerds can study and come up with.

If drafting for best player available, you could end up drafting a punter that's a once in a species punter (strong and accurate enough to coffin corner from own 20 yard line and could average 80 yards/punt if allowed to), over a slightly worse rated QB (say, a Peyton Manning?). That's BPA without considering position value.

Does player value outweigh position value? Does it outweigh position and team needs? Is player value and position value weighted against team possessions a greater gain than a team need elsewhere at a valued position? etc. Answering those questions in terms of what produces the most value is how I'd approach the first draft of a draft strategery.

 

[cowboyvic]

I haven't read all the posts in the thread, but I think the best approach is always taking the BPA at a position of need.

Nope, that will get you beat. J.J. Watt may be the best DE when we draft at 9. but do we Skip over an A.J. Green or Julio Jones to draft Watt. i say no.take the best player.

 

[Cowboy Brian]

Nope, that will get you beat. J.J. Watt may be the best DE when we draft at 9. but do we Skip over an A.J. Green or Julio Jones to draft Watt. i say no.take the best player.

I say trade down in that situation as the whole world knows the Commanders would take whichever one is left at #10. I wanted to riot when we took Dez last year, if we take another WR this year ill flip out.

 

[realtick]

Nope, that will get you beat. J.J. Watt may be the best DE when we draft at 9. but do we Skip over an A.J. Green or Julio Jones to draft Watt. i say no.take the best player.

That's such a silly myopic view on the topic. If you don't think filling needs is part of what goes into the draft equation, you're offbase.

 

[cowboyvic]

That's such a silly myopic view on the topic. If you don't think filling needs is part of what goes into the draft equation, you're offbase.

Wake up. you have to get value when you have a pick this high. you start drafting for need, and you will have what we had this year for a long time.WAKE UP!