Sperm Edwards Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 to be fair, drafting for position also gets you kyle brady over warren sapp we could go back and forth for weeks with examples on both sides, but I say if you are building a franchise, it's better to err on the side of taking the best player, because you can't predict the future of any position with any franchise ( cutler, burress, coles, stallworth, vick, etc etc etc) No it doesn't. The Jets didn't need a TE when they drafted Brady. We had Mitchell before his meltdown & it was part of the reason it was considered such a stupid draft pick. Sapp would have been the draft-for-need pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larz Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 No it doesn't. The Jets didn't need a TE when they drafted Brady. We had Mitchell before his meltdown & it was part of the reason it was considered such a stupid draft pick. Sapp would have been the draft-for-need pick. lets just get down to brass tacks is it better to build a franchise with the draft philosophy of taking BPA or to fill a need ? no squirming allowed, pick one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afosomf Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 I know...Still. still what???????? bears also have forte who is a very good receiver coming out of backfield bears will draft a wr in 2d too, loaded at wr in this years draft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Jet Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 still what???????? bears also have forte who is a very good receiver coming out of backfield bears will draft a wr in 2d too, loaded at wr in this years draft I still think Orton will have a better year. Bears can draft all the WR's they want - They will not have Denvers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afosomf Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 I still think Orton will have a better year. Bears can draft all the WR's they want - They will not have Denvers. then bet if you are so sure marshall will miss 1/2 season IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Jet Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 then bet if you are so sure marshall will miss 1/2 season IMO Sure? Really do you understand what the word "think" means. Unlike you I don't declare my feelings as fact. That's what I think will happen but I wont bet on anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 lets just get down to brass tacks is it better to build a franchise with the draft philosophy of taking BPA or to fill a need ? no squirming allowed, pick one That's just it, though. It's neither. Or both, depending on how you see it. If the BPA for us at #17 this year is a center, or any position on the OL for that matter, we don't take the BPA. If the BPA for us is a linebacker, we don't take the BPA. Pretty much the rest of the positions are ok (off the top of my head) to take the BPA. In the later rounds, it is a bit different. Certainly by the 4th at the latest, the position doesn't matter. Before that, it really depends who's there. If you have two (roughly) equally-rated players, and one is at a position of need & the other isn't, you take the need position. If there is a great disparity in how you have the players ranked, you go with the BPA. If the next combination of BPA/need is poor value at that spot in the draft, you trade down a bit. But you don't go drafting Hakeem Nicks #17 because there's a need for a WR. Now he may turn out to be a superstar WR for a decade, but the reality is that his draft stock isn't that high & you could (likely) trade down some, pick up an extra 2nd or 3rd rounder, and still get that same player. So you're asking me a question & offering me two possible answers where I couldn't say A or B in every situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afosomf Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 That's just it, though. It's neither. Or both, depending on how you see it. If the BPA for us at #17 this year is a center, or any position on the OL for that matter, we don't take the BPA. If the BPA for us is a linebacker, we don't take the BPA. Pretty much the rest of the positions are ok (off the top of my head) to take the BPA. In the later rounds, it is a bit different. Certainly by the 4th at the latest, the position doesn't matter. Before that, it really depends who's there. If you have two (roughly) equally-rated players, and one is at a position of need & the other isn't, you take the need position. If there is a great disparity in how you have the players ranked, you go with the BPA. If the next combination of BPA/need is poor value at that spot in the draft, you trade down a bit. But you don't go drafting Hakeem Nicks #17 because there's a need for a WR. Now he may turn out to be a superstar WR for a decade, but the reality is that his draft stock isn't that high & you could (likely) trade down some, pick up an extra 2nd or 3rd rounder, and still get that same player. So you're asking me a question & offering me two possible answers where I couldn't say A or B in every situation. Correct on 1st point, ties go to need We do not know where Nicks is rated on jets board as far as we know he could be 17 on jets board, jet scouts may like this kid more, i know mayock is in love with him who really cares about Kipers and mcshay's board means very little IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larz Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 So you're asking me a question & offering me two possible answers where I couldn't say A or B in every situation. fair enough and I don't necessarily disagree with your points but in general, as an overall strategy, I say you have to be vary wary of drafting or not drafting a player because of the current state of the roster. my point is simply that you can't predict the future, and if the worst thing that happens with drafting BPA is you have 2 good players at the same position, well that beats having drafted for a need and winding up with a clunker either way you can pick a bust, either way you can simply have mis-judged the players NFL potential, but as an overall strategy you have to go with taking the best players regardless of current roster I have to say the probablity and potential for a mistake is much greater with a need pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.