Question for all you BPA people...

[JoeyBoy718]

All you people claiming to want to draft Best Player Available at #16. Do you really mean that? Because I'd say there's about a 95% chance the BPA at #16 will be a TE or CB.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

All you people claiming to want to draft Best Player Available at #16. Do you really mean that? Because I'd say there's about a 95% chance the BPA at #16 will be a TE or CB.

If Watkins and Evans go early then Ebron will not be far behind. Gilbert is too special athletically to make it to 16 I think.

 

[ABQcowboyJR]

You take BPA or trade down.

 

[DFWJC]

All you people claiming to want to draft Best Player Available at #16. Do you really mean that? Because I'd say there's about a 95% chance the BPA at #16 will be a TE or CB.

Two things...
BPA applies to tier groups much (or all) of the time. That, in and of itself, provides some sanity and flexibility.
But if those two players are clearly the last two left in your highest remaining tier group....and If you use a BPA philosophy (and you didn't want a TE or CB that badly) you would look to trade down.

Pretty straight forward.

btw, who is to say CB is not somewhat of a priority anyway.
Of course, the next question would be ...just because you are I consider a player to be BPA at the the the, in no way say they think the same.

 

[RS12]

All you people claiming to want to draft Best Player Available at #16. Do you really mean that? Because I'd say there's about a 95% chance the BPA at #16 will be a TE or CB.

The teams weakness (front 7) is also the drafts weakness. IMO this team is only set at LT and C, only at QB and one WR if their backs hold up. That leaves plenty of room for BPA.

 

[waving monkey]

This is were I differ with most here. I

If there is a overwhelming need {Defensive Line} and the grade isn't lopsided there are times to
cover your ash tray. No team can make a habit of it, that results in a death spiral.
Becoming too dogmatic philosophically might result in losing the holistic view of your team.
But judicially applied it might be effective at times. Refer to QB's as an example.

 

[btcutter]

All you people claiming to want to draft Best Player Available at #16. Do you really mean that? Because I'd say there's about a 95% chance the BPA at #16 will be a TE or CB.

Of course. Because IMO there's no TE rated #16 on my board.

 

[Maxmadden]

It's all really a big crapshoot anyway. Is Clowney a guaranteed pick? If you have several players fairly close on talent level you take the one that best fits need (BFN). BPA is so overrated because you don't actually know who is the best player available, it's just an educated guess. Do your homework and take the player you think is the best player, but you can't change the definition of need.

need
nēd/
verb

1. 1.
   require (something) because it is essential or very important.

 

[Hardline]

If there is a blue chip player on the board when your pick comes up you take him regardless of position. I don't care if that position is already solid on your team. And yes,I wouldn't rule out Gilbert or Ebron. Both could very much improve the Cowboys.

 

[Fredd]

It's all really a big crapshoot anyway. Is Clowney a guaranteed pick? If you have several players fairly close on talent level you take the one that best fits need (BFN). BPA is so overrated because you don't actually know who is the best player available, it's just an educated guess. Do your homework and take the player you think is the best player, but you can't change the definition of need.

need
nēd/
verb

1. 1.
   require (something) because it is essential or very important.

This is my approach as well. there are certain positions that, even though the actual BPA might be next (ex: Ebron), you don't take him because there is no need at TE...if the team was one player away from a title run and didn't have any huge holes, then sure, someone like ebron can be the pick even with having the TE's that we have...but, since we don't need one, you use the BFN in tiers like:

tier 1: DL, OL
tier 2: LB, S
tier 3: CB, WR
tier 4: QB, RB, TE

you shouldn't take anyone from the tier 3 or tier 4 list in the first round, and not likely in the 2nd round; I look at it like this:

1st round: tier 1 (tier 2 ONLY if some stud is there that is better than all of the tier 1 guys)
2nd & 3rd rounds: tiers 1 & 2 (tier 3 only if some stud is there that is better than all of the tier 1/2 guys)

the only exceptions would be if something ridiculous happened like Watkins, Evans fell for some reason, then you consider them

 

[9darter]

All you people claiming to want to draft Best Player Available at #16. Do you really mean that?

Just watch all the threads here with comments like "I would have drafted DL earlier", "I don't think we can afford the luxury of going WR in round 1", "OL did a good job last year, we can't use our first pick there", "they just spend a third rounder on the position, no way we take a safety early" etc.

Also the "tier groups" argument is lame. "Blah blah, we had five players in the same tier and went [insert position of need]". If anything it's a need approach.

 

[xwalker]

All you people claiming to want to draft Best Player Available at #16. Do you really mean that? Because I'd say there's about a 95% chance the BPA at #16 will be a TE or CB.

Trades are a method to match BPA to need. If the top CB is available at 16, somebody will trade up for him. The Cowboys would remain with BPA even if they trade down and take the BPA at that pick.

The other option would be to take the top ranked CB and then release Carr after 2014 and use his salary to sign a top DL in free agency. The Cowboys need to be operating on a 2 year outlook because they can't expect to fill all of the holes on the roster in 1 year.

 

[JoeyBoy718]

Just watch all the threads here with comments like "I would have drafted DL earlier", "I don't think we can afford the luxury of going WR in round 1", "OL did a good job last year, we can't use our first pick there", "they just spend a third rounder on the position, no way we take a safety early" etc.

Also the "tier groups" argument is lame. "Blah blah, we had five players in the same tier and went [insert position of need]". If anything it's a need approach.

I agree BPA if one person is clearly better. Like I wouldn't be mad if we took Sammy Watkins at 16. But I wouldn't trade up for a guy like Watkins since he isn't a need. Only clear needs are DL but there might not be anyone worth trading up for. Maybe a small trade up for Donald. Maybe.

 

[Doomsday101]

All you people claiming to want to draft Best Player Available at #16. Do you really mean that? Because I'd say there's about a 95% chance the BPA at #16 will be a TE or CB.

That is why I think both need and BPA is important not one or the other. I'm sure if at 16 you will have 4 or 5 players grading out about the same the next logical question becomes which of those 4 to 5 also fit a need.

 

[Maxmadden]

Trades are a method to match BPA to need. If the top CB is available at 16, somebody will trade up for him. The Cowboys would remain with BPA even if they trade down and take the BPA at that pick.

The other option would be to take the top ranked CB and then release Carr after 2014 and use his salary to sign a top DL in free agency. The Cowboys need to be operating on a 2 year outlook because they can't expect to fill all of the holes on the roster in 1 year.

This is funny but this is true. We follow the BPA approach unless it doesn't match our needs then we trade down until it does. I know the purpose is to get the value but it seems contradictory to the BPA. Just keep trading down until the BPA matches a need, then we can say we took the BPA and didn't draft for need..

Not that I disagree with the approach because sometimes the value is just not there with your pick, but it is for someone else. Nobody goes strictly BPA.

 

[btcutter]

This is funny but this is true. We follow the BPA approach unless it doesn't match our needs then we trade down until it does. I know the purpose is to get the value but it seems contradictory to the BPA. Just keep trading down until the BPA matches a need, then we can say we took the BPA and didn't draft for need..

Not that I disagree with the approach because sometimes the value is just not there with your pick, but it is for someone else. Nobody goes strictly BPA.

But you need a partner in order to trade down. Furthermore, the partner may not be willing to pay your price or their spot is too far down for your liking.

I agree no one goes strictly BPA. Even Belicheck! Remember that Brady was drafted in the 6 and Patriots claimed that he was rated a 3rd rounder ? That's not BPA until Patriots simply have filled their need and now just picking based on value.

 

[Oh_Canada]

No team subscribes to BPA all the time...it just doesn't happen.

The Cowboys will NOT take a CB or TE with the first pick regardless of whose on the board.

If Bortles falls to the Commanders in round two, and he's BPA on their board do you think they take him to be their third starter?

The Lions thought it would be a good idea to do this a few years ago with WR's, it didn't work out so well.

 

[DFWJC]

No team subscribes to BPA all the time...it just doesn't happen.

The Cowboys will NOT take a CB or TE with the first pick regardless of whose on the board.

If Bortles falls to the Commanders in round two, and he's BPA on their board do you think they take him to be their third starter?

The Lions thought it would be a good idea to do this a few years ago with WR's, it didn't work out so well.

You are leaving out the trade option on all of your scenarios.

 

[ceerrece]

What about QB? If Bridgewater falls you can't scratch him because he fails on his pro day

 

[IrishAnto]

This is my approach as well. there are certain positions that, even though the actual BPA might be next (ex: Ebron), you don't take him because there is no need at TE...if the team was one player away from a title run and didn't have any huge holes, then sure, someone like ebron can be the pick even with having the TE's that we have...but, since we don't need one, you use the BFN in tiers like:

tier 1: DL, OL
tier 2: LB, S
tier 3: CB, WR
tier 4: QB, RB, TE

you shouldn't take anyone from the tier 3 or tier 4 list in the first round, and not likely in the 2nd round; I look at it like this:

1st round: tier 1 (tier 2 ONLY if some stud is there that is better than all of the tier 1 guys)
2nd & 3rd rounds: tiers 1 & 2 (tier 3 only if some stud is there that is better than all of the tier 1/2 guys)

the only exceptions would be if something ridiculous happened like Watkins, Evans fell for some reason, then you consider them

I would actually say it’s more than we don’t need a TE, it’s that we can’t find a way to properly use another one.

While Witten is still capable of being as effective as he’s been then the coaching staff hasn’t shown any ability to give any other TE a “fair crack of the whip”.

To than end yet another high pick on a TE would be a complete waste of a pick.

At that point (if you can’t trade down) pick somebody who you can use.