Parcells' draft strategy unpredictable

[AbeBeta]

I would argue in that case that he isn't the best player available. Lets not mix the issues. In my view best player available is choosing the best player available in the draft that fits your scheme without regard to team needs.

But I think what you are missing is that the entire concept of BPA is based on the idea that teams can clearly make ranking decisions between players -- the truth is that when you hit 18 to 20 or so that so many players are rated similarly that you can't just pick one and say "best player" -- well you could, but it would be naive. if say you have one player ranked an 80 and one an 81 why take the 81 if he is not going to be able to play when the 80 would? the difference between those rankings is so tiny that it doesn't make sense to adhere to the BPA concept in that case. now if you've got one guy who is a 90 and another who is an 80, of course you have to go BPA.

 

[Verdict]

But I think what you are missing is that the entire concept of BPA is based on the idea that teams can clearly make ranking decisions between players -- the truth is that when you hit 18 to 20 or so that so many players are rated similarly that you can't just pick one and say "best player" -- well you could, but it would be naive. if say you have one player ranked an 80 and one an 81 why take the 81 if he is not going to be able to play when the 80 would? the difference between those rankings is so tiny that it doesn't make sense to adhere to the BPA concept in that case. now if you've got one guy who is a 90 and another who is an 80, of course you have to go BPA.

In one of the examples you give, you are essentially saying that both players (80 & 81) are equal in ability, so you choose the need player over the "best player available. In your other example you are saying one player is truly better than the other by a significant margin, so you choose the best player available.

I think what you are saying is that reaching for a player is ok, so long as it is just a little bit of a reach. Practically speaking, most teams will reach, based upon need, at least to a degree. The better teams don't reach nearly as high, or as often on average as the bad teams do.

It would be absurd to say that if the best players on our board were quarterbacks that we would take seven quarterbacks in the draft, if they were available when we draft. But, ideally, you take the player you need at the value he is worth. Don't reach for picks.

I really advocate taking the best player available, or trading out of the spot. Reaching is not a good option.

Lets look at this subject a different way. Lets say you really need a defensive end badly (like we did for years) and the best player available isn't a defensive end. You can attempt to trade down if the BPA available isn't a defensive end, pick the best player available, or reach for the defensive end. If you choose the BPA you arguably won't be filling the defensive end position that you desperately need to fill, but will acquire a good player with that pick. If you reach, you probably will end up wasting that draft pick and get a subpar player that gets you no where (Kavika Pittman, Shante Carver, et. al.)

 

[sago1]

I think 05 was a great draft year for us and I credit Parcells, Ireland & even Jones. After draft was over, I didn't think it was so great since I wanted to add a WR, FS, etc,--picking 2 more defensive players in last 2 rounds was disappointing. Came around as I heard more about these guys and their play in TC/preseason games. Now I wouldn't part with Ratliff, Bieraut & even Burnett. They just young guys now but 1-2 years down the road, who knows.

When Parcells drafts, think he decides on need & BPA particularly in early rounds. Ware & Spears fit that mold & so did Burnett w/o the issues Thurman or Tatupi (sp?) brought (don't remember which one had problems). Not going to rehash rest of draft but later rounds were about BPA & no reaching. Parcells didn't intend draft 2 defensive players in later rounds & OT, but he wasn't going to draft a FS just cause the guy was still there. We'd probably have drafted FS cause he was there w/o knowing level of talent, etc. We didn't get the WR or FS we wanted, but Ratliff & Beriaut looked pretty good before they injuried & Pettiti played best he could all things considered. In this draft we got our starters (Ware, Spears & Canty) but also luckily acquired immediate backup like Ratliff (and Pepper Johnson--rookie UFA). That's quite a haul for one draft. When Burnett returns healthy, he probably will win out starting ILB position but not if he can't beat out the competition and Parcells loves competition at all the positions.

Remember we all spent years watching Jerry Jones draft strictly for need or cause he got some bright idea or fell in love with particularly player--most of whom turned out to be worthless. No more of that.

I'm like most of you; love to play the mock draft game & who I can trade with, etc. But we haven't a clue which player will fall to us, who we can trade with to move up/down, etc. Got to have cool nerves to handle that type of pressure with limited time to make decision which has huge effect otn eam's performance. But we can bet we get one player many want, 1-2 players who sound good & several guys we haven't heard of but hope they work out. Hope we have another great draft.

 

[fortdick]

Ware - Need - Needed speed rusher with ability to play up or down.

Spears - Need - Needed big DE who can play SDE in either schem or go inside some in nickel and 4 man line.

Burnett - Need - Big athletic LB who can play in either scheme (if healthy).

Barber - Need - Needed depth at RB with fragile #1 RB. Solid in pass blocking and catching.

Canty - Need - Needed the guy across from Spears to add size to DL.

Beriault - Need - Needed safety depth no matter if he's a SS or FS because we know Dixon/Scott aren't the answer. He's eventually going to FS IMO.

Ratliff - Need - Needed overall size and depth on the DL as older, 4-3 oriented players are phased out.

We were 6-10! We needed everything!

 

[Clove]

I'm like most of you; love to play the mock draft game & who I can trade with, etc. But we haven't a clue which player will fall to us, who we can trade with to move up/down, etc. Got to have cool nerves to handle that type of pressure with limited time to make decision which has huge effect otn eam's performance. But we can bet we get one player many want, 1-2 players who sound good & several guys we haven't heard of but hope they work out. Hope we have another great draft.

That's because Jerry Jones is not a talent evaluator.

Not many teams would've picked Spears unless they were employing a 3-4 system. We knew San Diego was breathing down our backs and therefore we had to pull the trigger on Ware.

Ware would've been the second choice behind Spears if the Chargers weren't around. Meaning, the BPA was Spears and not Ware.

I completely disagree on BPA. And like the other poster said, you pick the best player available according to your needs. If you need a QB/FS/WR/G, in that order, and the WR is the BPA for your needs, then you pull the trigger on the WR...There you go, the BPA....

I do agree with trading down, if the player you wanted and needed is not there, or you know for sure another team will not select the next player you're interested in, then you trade down. Right now, we have 3 teams that run a 3-4 behind us on the draft board.

So we have to be real careful with trading down if we want DT/or OLB'rs.
If the BPA on any board when it's time to pick 18th is DE Tamba Hali, and right after that is Bobby Carpenter and Manny Lawson or Tapp, and we choose Hali over any of these, BP will be put on a boat, and shipped to peru with sumo underwear on.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Nothing would surprise me on draft day. I could see us trade up

Not sure that is on the agenda. I am completely opposed to that.

 

[Verdict]

Not sure that is on the agenda. I am completely opposed to that.

I hear ya. I'm not really high on trading up either, but it would not surprise me, depending what free agents we sign.