Reaching for a Player in the Draft

[CF74]

Can someone explain to me about, "Reaching for a Player in the Draft?" Let's just say for the sake of argument we need....uhhh...we don't really truly have one anymore but again for the sake of discussion, let's say we need a NT.

So we are sitting at pick #51 and the BPA is a RB, well we don't need a RB we have 3 that could start for nearly any team. Some would say trade the pick away but there's a really good NT available still but his value is say 5-10 picks away. Based on what? And so what? Why not pick the best guy available for your need? The draft is a crap shoot anyways. Meh.

I don't get it.

 

[DaBoys4Life]

That wouldn't be considered reaching. An example of reaching is in last years draft when the Jags decided to trade up into the top 10 for the DE from florida. Where they could of had him at the spot they were drafting in.

 

[ZeroClub]

Can someone explain to me about, "Reaching for a Player in the Draft?" Let's just say for the sake of argument we need....uhhh...we don't really truly have one anymore but again for the sake of discussion, let's say we need a NT.

So we are sitting at pick #51 and the BPA is a RB, well we don't need a RB we have 3 that could start for nearly any team. Some would say trade the pick away but there's a really good NT available still but his value is say 5-10 picks away. Based on what? And so what? Why not pick the best guy available for your need? The draft is a crap shoot anyways. Meh.

I don't get it.

Well, if you are stacked at RB, and the best value at #51 is a RB, there are likely going to be a few other guys available who don't play RB, but who still represent a solid value. Maybe an OT, maybe a LB ... a position that you could use, but who doesn't fill your number 1 need position (NT, in your example).

It is one thing to avoid drafting a specific position where you are already stacked.

It is another thing to decide that, no matter what, you are going to draft a specific position, even if you aren't getting good value for your pick.

Jerry used to reach for players. Shaunte Carver was one of those. If I remember right, Kiper thought David LaFleur was a reach. Quincy Carter was taken several rounds earlier than his market value, people used to say. Jerry doesn't do that so much anymore, which is a good thing.

I think a good example of the right strategy was shown when the Cowboys took Bennett in last year's draft. Even though TE wasn't a huge need position, the team thought Bennett was a strong value, and so they picked him, instead of reaching for another position ....

 

[Bob Sacamano]

a reach is taking Quincy Carter in the 2nd so you can lock him up to a 5-year deal

when he's a 4th rounder

 

[Biggems]

Can someone explain to me about, "Reaching for a Player in the Draft?" Let's just say for the sake of argument we need....uhhh...we don't really truly have one anymore but again for the sake of discussion, let's say we need a NT.

So we are sitting at pick #51 and the BPA is a RB, well we don't need a RB we have 3 that could start for nearly any team. Some would say trade the pick away but there's a really good NT available still but his value is say 5-10 picks away. Based on what? And so what? Why not pick the best guy available for your need? The draft is a crap shoot anyways. Meh.

I don't get it.

Well from what I understand, teams assess their needs.....and then do best players at each position of need...then they rank all those players based on some value board.

So, if a RB is up, he may be the overall best player, but since we dont need a RB, we would either trade down, or pick the best available on our draft chart.

Also, not every team will follow the exact same rankings. While one team may have QB A as the top QB, another team will have QB B as the top QB. Also, who is to say that one team has a QB as the top pick, while another has OT and yet another has LB........

 

[SLATEmosphere]

So would a reach be the Cowboys getting Aaron Curry?

 

[CF74]

Well, if you are stacked at RB, and the best value at #51 is a RB, there are likely going to be a few other guys available who don't play RB, but who still represent a solid value. Maybe an OT, maybe a LB ... a position that you could use, but who doesn't fill your number 1 need position (NT, in your example).

It is one thing to avoid drafting a specific position where you are already stacked.

It is another thing to decide that, no matter what, you are going to draft a specific position, even if you aren't getting good value for your pick.

Jerry used to reach for players. Shaunte Carver was one of those. If I remember right, Kiper thought David LaFleur was a reach. Quincy Carter was taken several rounds earlier than his market value, people used to say. Jerry doesn't do that so much anymore, which is a good thing.

I think a good example of the right strategy was shown when the Cowboys took Bennett in last year's draft. Even though TE wasn't a huge need position, the team thought Bennett was a strong value, and so they picked him, instead of reaching for another position ....

Ahh history. Now that's a subject I respect.

 

[cowboyjoe]

you go by your draft board that you, your scouts, coaches put together, and you stick to your draft board.

say for example when we pick our player at 51st slot, but all the top safeties, offensive linemen and linebackers are off the board.

but you have running backs, etc from 51 slot to 71 slot. So, you reach way down for a player at the 72nd slot to fill a need. Thats when you reach, or if you trade way up for a player and give away the farm so to speak like Mike Dikta did for ricky the big running back from Texas.

Thats reaching, you dont give away the farm, or like when the cowboys did in 2000 i think when they gave away 2 number one picks for joey galloway, thats reaching.

you stay with your draft board and the trade value, if you tend to make a trade.

 

[RS12]

I thought drafting Shante Carver in the first round was a reach, even though he was a big time pass rusher.