So here are some guiding questions that might be helpful in making some key decisions during the upcoming draft:
- What type of team are we trying to be and does this player fit that philosophy?
- (For round 1-3 players) Can this player start and have impact immediately or will he need more developmental time?
- (In each round) What player is rated highest on our board and does he make sense at this moment?
- Using our scouting system, player evaluations and draft board ratings, which position of need has the deepest number of impact players?
- Using the above thinking, here’s an example question: If the RB position (or WR, DT, OL etc) is deep, can we get a comparable player in the next round or pick at the same position?
- Are we potentially missing a great player because we are too focused on a position?
- Before trading down in round one, ask the question, “Are we missing a great player only to settle for a good player?”
It is interesting to look at the strategies the best GM's employ. There is a *disclaimer I will add at the end.
Bill Veach:
As for the actual draft itself, Kansas City has been successful in going with the conventional “best player available” route. With the centerpiece of the team in quarterback Patrick Mahomes already in place for many years to come, Veach says the Chiefs can focus on filling the roster with talented football players instead of prioritizing need —
most of the time.
“We’re looking for good football players and we’re also looking for a room fit, a cultural fit, and how they fit with our coaching staff,” Veach responded when asked what the team considers before drafting a player. “There are so many things that we take into consideration. Every year, when you have these drafts and you see whether it be a mock draft or guys listed on the board, I think people tend to forget that there’s a lot of dialogue. It’s not like, ‘Chiefs like smaller receivers.’ But don't reach for a position of need if a superior athlete is available. Take the best player."
Howie Roseman:
"People can overthink the draft process. Take that risk if you believe the athlete is top tier. Don't take an inferior player at a position if that means you pass up a great athlete. Some call this the 'best player available' strategy. You will have more hits than misses--don't pass up a great athlete. Trust your coaches to turn that player into NFL material."
While there are some posters here that have openly said the BPA strategy is not employed and is stupid (including posters I have a lot of respect for on this forum), this shows that two of the best GM's over the past ten years certainly employ this strategy often.
Now for the *disclaimer. Veach and Roseman have built teams that have fewer holes to fill than teams like the Giants, Browns, Jets, Jags, etc. Bottom feeding teams might not have a choice but to fill a glaring weakness or five. Teams like KC, Philly, Detroit, Baltimore, may have a hole to fill, a starter to upgrade...then backfill for depth and development players. And then there are teams like the Cowboys. We do have talent, despite some of the doom and gloom seen here. But we are in that tough middle ground where you see a weak spot that may have lingered for a few years (run defense) or need to keep building a position group (o-line) that is vital to team success. Do we have the luxury of drafting a superior athlete over a lesser player that fills an immediate need? This is a tough question.
Two examples to look at. The Chiefs needed a center. Creed Humphrey has a draft profile score of 6.26, meaning he would become an average starter. His next gen score was 84--good player, nothing more. While there were better players on the board, Reid and Veach didn't see a better athlete lineman there, so they took Humphrey. Worked out great, as he's the best center in the game. The Eagles didn't need a center, and in the 6th round Jason Kelce was sitting there waiting to be taken. Who in their right mind would take a 280 lb center, especially if one wasn't needed? But they were looking for o-line depth, and saw his insanely good athletic score, second-best out of all OL at the combine. Roseman, consulting with Howard Mudd (Kelce could be the next Jeff Saturday, another undersized center) pulled the trigger because he wasn't letting that kind of athlete hang out there. The rest became history.
Of course, one can point to failures of this strategy too. We've seen superior athletes flame out and not make the cut. But if two of the best in the business are more than willing to employ BPA, who am I to argue? Is it right for us this draft? I don't know.
