Don't understand all the BPA talk

[goshan]

It is clear to me that with one exception (Hatcher), we DID draft heavily for need. Listen to Parcells.

1. We needed to get younger at LB and find someone opposite Ware.
2. We needed a return guy
3. Based upon Bill's offensive philsophy, we needed a TE to complement Witten.
4. We needed a young nose tackle.

 

[MiStar]

It is clear to me that with one exception (Hatcher), we DID draft heavily for need. Listen to Parcells.

1. We needed to get younger at LB and find someone opposite Ware.
2. We needed a return guy
3. Based upon Bill's offensive philsophy, we needed a TE to complement Witten.
4. We needed a young nose tackle.

We also could have easily used an offensive lineman before the seventh round, but we didn't take one. We could have done well without TE and kick returner, but we still picked them up way before we ended up taking an offensive lineman.

 

[AsthmaField]

It is clear to me that with one exception (Hatcher), we DID draft heavily for need. Listen to Parcells.

1. We needed to get younger at LB and find someone opposite Ware.
2. We needed a return guy
3. Based upon Bill's offensive philsophy, we needed a TE to complement Witten.
4. We needed a young nose tackle.

I guess they mean that they took what was there but still had needs to fill. For instance: While we needed an OLB, TE, FS, return guy, and NT... we also needed an OT and a G. We could've taken those in nearly any order, but they did it in a way that we took the best one that was there. We could've taken Bobby Carpenter in round 1 and then gone NT, FS, OT, G, or TE in round 2. We chose TE because of all those positions, the TE was the highest rated on our board. Had Vernon Davis fell to pick 18, we probably would've gone TE first and then OLB later in the draft. Had Santonio Holmes been there at our second pick... we might have gone returner in round 2.

IOW, there was a little picking for need, but they still stayed true to our board and picked the highest rated player on the board... or at least the highest rated within the framework of positions we needed. But there is always that.

 

[big dog cowboy]

We could have done well without TE

New offense needed another starting TE that could block and catch. He wasn't currently on our roster. Did you have another suggestion?

 

[burmafrd]

I think NEED might have been a little more emphasized when picking both Carpenter and Fasano; BPA with Hatcher. Green also seemed to be need. Stanley as well. It does seem that need was more emphasized- but they did seem to hold true to their value ratings. Now whether or not their value ratings are good is something we will have to wait to see. Watkins is the guy that slipped- so taking him is both BPA and NEED.

 

[scottsp]

Without knowing what Dallas' or any other team's board looks like, hard to say if the organization went BPA or not.

For Dallas, yes OLB was a need. It so happened there were two available at 18 that made sense there. In the second round, I personally did not see them going tight end, but I do remember Goose making the statement a couple hours before the pick to watch out for such a thing. He named Joe Klopfenstein and Fasano. Gosselin really seemed to like these guys before the round even began.

Also, I would imagine a lot of teams boards aren't built without taking their own needs into account. Maybe not the highest priority, but I'm sure it figures in to some extent. Besides, this team had a number of areas it needed to address.

 

[Hostile]

Without knowing what Dallas' or any other team's board looks like, hard to say if the organization went BPA or not.

For Dallas, yes OLB was a need. It so happened there were two available at 18 that made sense there. In the second round, I personally did not see them going tight end, but I do remember Goose making the statement a couple hours before the pick to watch out for such a thing. He named Joe Klopfenstein and Fasano. Gosselin really seemed to like these guys before the round even began.

Also, I would imagine a lot of teams boards aren't built without taking their own needs into account. Maybe not the highest priority, but I'm sure it figures in to some extent. Besides, this team had a number of areas it needed to address.

All the Draft publications in the world fall behind the actual teams when it comes to what they want. No matter how good a job they do studying the film on these kids and eying what their competition has to say about them as well, they still have a stone wall they can't peek around. They do not know what strategies a team is thinking of employing and they do not know how the private workouts and interviews with the players change things.

Am I saying the teams always pick right? No, but they actually know what they are looking for and sometimes they don't want to screw around with it. Dallas obviously knew they wanted Hatcher. They saw something they felt helps this team move forward. Word is New England was upset because they had Hatcher targeted at the top of the 4th round. Shock of all shock, Dallas knew what they were doing.

Just guessing here, but I think Dallas' Day 1 went exactly the way they hoped, and we got the exact 3 players they wanted before the day ever started.

 

[goshan]

Reading between the lines, the only thing that may have changed day 1 was if Coledge or Winston were on the board in the 2nd. Don't know if we would have picked them (especially Coledge) or Fasano but it seems we were interested in him.

 

[TruBlueCowboy]

We also could have easily used an offensive lineman before the seventh round, but we didn't take one. We could have done well without TE and kick returner, but we still picked them up way before we ended up taking an offensive lineman.

I agree. Wasn't a draft for need at all. Ireland even admitted that they desperately wanted an offensive lineman in the early rounds but felt at each pick that the best ones would be a reach. There's always going to be a certain degree of drafting for need but reaching is like what the Cowboys did a few years ago when they drafted a corner at almost every pick just to fix one position, or David LaFleur in the first just to replace Novacek.

 

[kmd24]

Basically, it seems like Dallas had several players targeted and traded down to take them in a spot where they would be the BPA.

For example, Ireland (I think it was him) talked about how they were considering trading down from pick 18 but knew that both guys they were considering would probably be gone, so they just took the guy they wanted.

Then, in the second round, they were apparently considering OL, but when the board dried up, they saw that they could trade down and get Fasano in a spot that made sense for his valuation. Same thing in the third with Hatcher.

This is excellent strategy, assuming that the Cowboys were somewhat aware of the valuation that other teams had placed on the players that were targeted. You might disagree with the valuation, but once that is set, this strategy is pretty optimal.

The final thing I would add is that Parcells puts a lot of value on a few characteristics like toughness, discipline, and love for the game that are perhaps not considered (but at least not valued as highly) by other coaches and organizations, and that may just rule certain players out altogehter. Knowing that other teams will take these players regardless of what this organization deems fatal flaws certainly affects the way Dallas is willing to work the boards.

 

[Hostile]

Reading between the lines, the only thing that may have changed day 1 was if Coledge or Winston were on the board in the 2nd. Don't know if we would have picked them (especially Coledge) or Fasano but it seems we were interested in him.

Eric Winston was there. He went 66 to the Texans. BTW, I consider that a great pick.

 

[RiggoForever]

It is clear to me that with one exception (Hatcher), we DID draft heavily for need. Listen to Parcells.

1. We needed to get younger at LB and find someone opposite Ware.
2. We needed a return guy
3. Based upon Bill's offensive philsophy, we needed a TE to complement Witten.
4. We needed a young nose tackle.

I feel you dude. Take solace in the fact that Skins fans were pretty much assuming we were going BPA rather then need as well. Trading up to get McIntosh kind of tips our cards that we needed a 3 down outside linebacker (which Arrington wasn't this past year), and that the staff isn't sold with who we have on the roster currently.

The only team in our division that drafted BPA throughout the entire draft was the Giants in my opinion. They really didn't need a defensive end or receiver. I really don't like the thought of their 1st rounder getting tutored by Strahan and Umenyiora.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

Agreed, looks like our return solution turned out FAT!

 

[big dog cowboy]

Dallas obviously knew they wanted Hatcher. They saw something they felt helps this team move forward. Word is New England was upset because they had Hatcher targeted at the top of the 4th round. Shock of all shock, Dallas knew what they were doing.

Just guessing here, but I think Dallas' Day 1 went exactly the way they hoped, and we got the exact 3 players they wanted before the day ever started.

We actually burn the Pats twice day one. They also wanted Fasano (according to the ticket on draft day) and were looking to move up to get him. It was also reported that Hatcher was on the wish list of a couple of other teams at the end of round 3. These people that claim we could have got him later are just wrong.

I am in agreement with your assessment about day one. There were backup plans for each pick of course. But I think we got the top name on the list for each pick. The one player we might have drafted if he were still there is Darryn Colledge. It would have been interesting to see player we would have picked had he been available.

 

[lostinomiya]

I agree. Wasn't a draft for need at all. Ireland even admitted that they desperately wanted an offensive lineman in the early rounds but felt at each pick that the best ones would be a reach. There's always going to be a certain degree of drafting for need but reaching is like what the Cowboys did a few years ago when they drafted a corner at almost every pick just to fix one position, or David LaFleur in the first just to replace Novacek.

it might have not been a draft for need in the sense of reaching for someone far above their relative value. however, BPA doesnt = need OR want. the cowboys drafted for want apart from hatcher who might have been BPA according to their board.

Regardless, if it were BPA we might have gotten another CB or LB but from the way Parcells etc spoke it is clear they drafted people with a specific role in mind and in that sense a need (maybe not a NEED but adding something to the team that it lacked). to go into the draft with those roles and the players to fill those roles alreadt in mind strongly suggests that they did not blindly draft BPA regardless of the role that player would have on the team.