The draft: position need or best player?

[corrupt3d]

Since plenty of teams need young franchise qbs, you try to trade out.

If you can't, and the other players are clearly in your opinion worse than Brohm, then yeah, go ahead and take him.

Brunell is what, 37 now?

Collins is not only 35, he's really not worth much to us if Saunders is gone.

So take Brohm, and let him learn.

The 49ers brought in Steve Young when they had Joe Montana.

Then they brought in Jeff Garcia when Young was the star.

We drafted Joe Theisman onto a team with Jurgy and Kilmer.

The Broncos drafted Tommy Maddux in the early 90s (that didn't work out)

The Falcons took Matt Schaub when they had Vick (and kept the wrong guy).

Obviously no situation is exactly the same, but if I had a choice between having to good quarterbacks for the future, as opposed to having a DE/WR/CB we think will be good but aren't really sure about, give me the QB.

Jason can handle competition.

If he falters with a rookie behind him, he's not our guy anyway.

We didnt draft Joe theismann

And the difference is, Jason hasn't established himself yet - lets not replace him while he's still learning AND pay two late first rounders at the same time

[FrFan]

The best needed player

[wildbill1952]

If a policy or procedure is the right thing, then it should always apply. Sometimes it helps to see what the results of a policy are if carried to the extreme.

Pick a position, any position, and try this. Pretend that that position is the best player available going forward for the next 3 years, every time we have our number one draft pick available. Pick Left Tackle, Long Snapper, or Tight End, (I chose those because obviously, those are our only Pro Bowl players.) or any position. I'll narrow it down to TE because Cooley is very, very good and obviously not a position we need when compared to other needs.

So the BPA this year is the second coming of Kellen Winslow. We draft him. He signs. We have the two best tight ends in the league. Now next year we're 25 in the draft. Same thing. Another year, another Kellen Winslow/Chris Cooley/Jeremy Shockey falls into our sights. We draft him too. Now we have 3 tight ends. Well we sit the rookie and alternate the other two and run a lot of jumbo packages so we get to use what we have. Next year, we do it again because the next one is better than all of these ever was. We now have 4 tight ends. We have the best depth in the history of the NFL for TE.

We probably go 1-15. Because our O-line is still playing with 12-year vets. All of our WR's are 4 years older and 2 steps slower.

What do you do with 4 TE's on a team? Send one out for doughnuts and one for coffee and keep one for backup?

What you end up with is precisely what Detroit has done for the past 3 years. They got the BPA each of their last 3 drafts and it was always a WR. And if there's any team we owned last year, it was Detroit.

BPA usually equals a "skill player" and linemen are never considered to be a BPA. But you build a team with linemen, both offensive and defensive. Our greatest need is offense since the defense at least showed up for every game last year except NE. But our offense was mediocre, at best. So if we agree that offense has bigger needs than the defense, and we agree that the BPA is not a good idea (which I know mosty of you do not agree with) then we draft offensive linemen, preferably a guard who can pull with some agility with some size and strength to push the pile back and the youth that keeps him from getting hurt every other season.

It's not the most popular idea on this board or a splashy pick in the draft, but it's the way to build an offense.

[nightbird]

We didnt draft Joe theismann

And the difference is, Jason hasn't established himself yet - lets not replace him while he's still learning AND pay two late first rounders at the same time

Ok my mistake, we didn't draft him, but we did acquire him.

As I noted, there are differences between all of them, and I in no way suggested drafting Brohm to "replace" Jason.

My point is, I'd rather have another great young QB in case something happens to Jason. He could be a long-term backup. Or we could trade him to a qb-desperate team down the road for multiple picks.

If the choice is that, or someone who we think will turn out like, say Kenard Lang or Matt Jones (I'm just picking random DE and WR who were chosen around #21 recently), again, I'll take another quarterback.

[Oldskool]

Best player at the needed position. Picking the BPA while not addressing the deficiencies in the O and D line and at WR and maybe LB would be a wasted pick.

[clskinsfan]

I think so. I think we take best available out of:

WR, OL, DL, DB, in no particular order.

Why draft DE if they aren;t going to make an impact? IF there is a DE that will make more of an impact at #21 than a WR, then that is what we do.

But, we draft #21 and I think Limas Sweed will be the best player for us.

Sweed was a force as a junior but he is not a first round pick. That wrist has given him hell. May be able to get him in round 2 i think.

[clskinsfan]

One position not being talked about is running back. Lets face it Portis isnt getting any younger and Betts didnt look very good this year. I think its possible Rashard Mendenhall might be available. If he is I think you gotta grab him.

[Laron Burgundy]

Portis is only 26 and this year was actually better than his first year here. He's fine and he'll be a lot better with a decent offensive line in front of him. Running back would be a terrible pick in the first round. I'm all for best player available at a position he could start at.

The only reason you sit a first rounder for a year is if he's a qb or if he's sitting behind a player on the verge of retiring or leaving in free agency; there's no reason to draft depth in the first round when we still need starters at certain positions.

Now, do we have to fill our biggest needs first? No. But I'd be a little sore if we drafted a qb, rb, or te in the first round.

[Oldfan]

It's my understanding that most NFL teams use their first day draft picks on BPA, but later in the draft lean toward need.

Seems logical to me. Drafting for need and passing up the BPA means that you will lower your batting average on the most valuable picks over the long term. But, the lower round picks are such lonshots anyway, that you might just as well draft for need and hope you get lucky.

[tex]

BPA at a position of need by trading up or down as required. Only problem is you must have a trading partner and sometimes there aren't any teams willing to trade in a way favorable to your need. That's why teams reach.

[Veretax]

One position not being talked about is running back. Lets face it Portis isnt getting any younger and Betts didnt look very good this year. I think its possible Rashard Mendenhall might be available. If he is I think you gotta grab him.

Yeah he's good, buyt hes know peterson, If you wait til round 3-7 you might be able to grab a Ray Rice, Chris Johnson, or Steve Slaton.

[l!ghtbringr]

are half of you people reading what you're jotting down here?

"We need a mix of both strategies, best player available at the position we need."

Um....that would be drafting for need. You did not just combine strategies. You chose need. Like we would actually draft worse players at our need positions during our picks. Gee guys, I think we should move down our table for this one...

It's an either/or question: Need or BPA. Ya'll are just starting to look like you're not paying attention when you say BPA at our position of need.

[Seabee1973]

Draft DL in the first round which we have needed the last 7 years enough of this take the best player availble crap or you end up with a secondary of all top ten picks but no one can get pressure on the ball

[RWJ]

As I have always been for, you trade down each and every year to save money on the salary cap. I think it is safer to have more players in the early rounds by trading down then putting your money on 1 particular pick. The later round picks should be used on a particular P or PK you have an eye on to obtain them. Plus, with the later round picks you trade them to other teams to receive earlier round picks in the next year's draft.

[1972FAN]

Need or trade out for need.

[wildbill1952]

are half of you people reading what you're jotting down here?

"We need a mix of both strategies, best player available at the position we need."

Um....that would be drafting for need. You did not just combine strategies. You chose need. Like we would actually draft worse players at our need positions during our picks. Gee guys, I think we should move down our table for this one...

It's an either/or question: Need or BPA. Ya'll are just starting to look like you're not paying attention when you say BPA at our position of need.

Well said. I was trying to figure out how to say it without being insulting. But your post works fine.

You are exactly right. The BPA strategy and the draft for need strategy are two very different strategies. You might compromise slightly by saying our need of an OL is a 10 (out of 10), but our need of a pass-rushing DE is an 8, and the best DE available outshines the best OL available, but it seldom works out that easy. You are still basically drafting for need, with a nod to the BPA.

The best player available strategy says you draft a WR even if you have 2 all-Pro #1 pick WR's on your team (see Detroit). Or you draft a replacement for a 26 year-old Portis who already has a reliable backup with a recently signed long-term contract in Betts . With this strategy you do not draft to replace a 36 year OL who lets your QB get killed 4 or 5 plays a game. It doesn't matter what all Pros there are on your team or whatever your glaring weaknesses are. You go after the BPA. Rank them all 1 to 275, who's left? Done. See ya at the bar after the press conference.

Drafting for need is harder in that you just don't rate the draftees one to 275 and then pick whatever is left when it's your turn. Drafting need also requires you to do an honest assessment of your current team and an assessment of all the players available in the draft. This is why Houston drafted Mario instead of Bush when the chance came up. If they had drafted the best player available, by all counts they would have gone with Bush. But they needed defense. From what I see, it was the better strategy.

Our defense looked world's better than our offense last year. The defense stood toe-to-toe with every team they played last year except NE. The offense looked good twice - against Detroit (who drafted their 3rd WR in a row using the BPA strategy) and against the Cowboys in the last game. Our greatest need is offense. I don't think anyone disagrees with that. Drafting a BPA at this point means you could end up with a QB, a RB, a TE, a CB or any other position where we already have good players and is a waste when the need is so large for quality OL.

[1972FAN]

Again, thats why I said need, if a player of value for that need is not there for that pick, trade out.

[Afrocentric Pak Man]

BPA at a position of need. I would identify D-End and WR as our biggest position of need. We need O-line help as well but we need to build the interior of the o-line and guards and centers typically don't go in round 1.

Ideal draft by position:

Round 1- D-End

Round 2- O-Line (Guard)

Round 3- Cornerback

Round 5- O-Line (Tackle)

Round 6- D-Tackle

Round 7- Safety

WR should be addressed in free agency.....I'm hoping we trade down for another pick in the 1st 3 rounds. Also Corner can be moved down the priority list depending on what we do with Springs and free agency....

[jsmith2003]

If we could trade down our 1st pick (21) to obtain a later round 1, with say a 3 and 4 from someone, or even 1, 3 and 5 we could pull in some much needed youth. Linemen to work into backups. Only do this though if we still think we can get a Sweed/Calais Campbell caliber player there in round 1 still.

Per nfldraftcountdown.com, showing some good tall WR's out there

Limas Sweed stats = (Texas - 6'5" 219lbs 4.60/40time) to be round 1

Year GP Rec Yds YPC TD

2003 DNP - - - -

2004 11 23 263 11.4 0

2005 13 36 545 15.1 5

2006 13 46 801 17.4 12

2007 6 19 306 16.1 3

Totals 50 124 1,915 15.4 20 (not as good over 4 years vs Kelly's 3 years) (??)

Malcolm Kelly = (Oklahoma - 6'4" 219lbs 4.55/40time)

Year GP Rec Yds YPC TD

2005 11 33 471 14.3 2

2006 14 62 993 16.0 10

2007 14 49 821 16.8 9

Totals 39 144 2,285 15.9 21 (decent stats)

James Hardy = (Indiana - 6'7" 220lbs 4.60/40time)

Year GP Rec Yds YPC TD

2004 DNP - - - -

2005 10 61 893 14.6 10

2006 10 51 722 14.2 10

2007 13 79 1125 14.2 16

Totals 33 191 2740 14.3 36

Adarius Bowman = (Oklahoma St. - 6'4" 220lbs 4.55/40time)predicted rd 2or3

Year GP Rec Yds YPC TD

2003 12 10 181 18.1 2

2004 6 18 329 18.3 3

2005 DNP - - - -

2006 13 60 1181 19.7 12

2007 11 67 1006 15.0 8

Totals 42 155 2697 17.4 25

Marcus Monk = (Arkansas - 6'6" 220lbs 4.60/40time)

Year GP Rec Yds YPC TD

2004 11 37 569 15.4 6

2005 11 35 476 13.6 7

2006 6 19 384 20.3 3

2007 6 12 116 9.7 3

Totals 34 103 1545 15.0 19

That rounds up all the WR's we should look at I think

OT's

Chris Williams Vanderbilt (predicted to go in 2 or 3) 6'6" 320 40time = 5.25 (can play tackle or guard (versatile))

Carl Nicks Nebraska (predicted to go in 2 or 3) 6'5" 330lbs 40time = 5.35 (can play left or right tackle)

Kirk Barton Ohio State (predicted to be a mid rounder) 6'6" 310 40time = 5.30 (best fit marked as Right Tackle (replacement eventually for Jansen?))

OG's

Drew Radovich USC (predicted to be mid-rounder) 6'5" 305 40time = 5.20 (can play tackle or guard)

Robert Felton Arkansas (predicted to be late rounder) 6'4" 328 40time = 5.45 (can play all along the line)

DE's (only noted BIG DE's)

Calais Campbell Miami 6'8" 280 40time = 4.85

Phillip Merling Clemson 6'5" 280 40time = 4.75

Jason Jones Eastern Michigan 6'5" 270 40time = 4.75

OLB's

Shawn Crable Michigan 6'5" 241 40time 4.65

Tavares Gooden Miami 6'2" 238 40time = 4.50

Beau Bell UNLV 6'3" 245 40time = 4.65

CB's

Aqib Talib Kansas 6'2" 205 40time = 4.55 (13 picks/3 yrs & 43 PBU)

Antoine Cason Arizona 6'0" 185 40time = 4.55 (15 picks/4 yrs & 32 PBU)

Chevis Jackson LSU 6'0" 190 40time = 4.60 (8 picks/4 yrs & 36 PBU)

There's some good young talent out there, in sizes that we need to look at and more importantly the positions we need to go for. Let me know what you think, I don't watch "much" college ball but trying to base above on stats.

HAIL

[artmonkforHOF]

Easy: A combo of need and best player available. Take our top 3 needs DL, WR, DB/OL and choose from that group when its your turn.

Ok but say we get to #21 and all the good true first rounders are taken at those respective positions, do you take the next DL who really is a 2nd or 3rd round pick in the first? This is my argument for BPA.

I think this draft is unique for us given the cap situation. I would love to draft the BPA and then fill homes with trades/FA, but we will not be able to go out and sign players as easily as we have done in the past. So there is the argument for position.

I dont know how this happened but I just confused myself with my own logic.

[corrupt3d]

are half of you people reading what you're jotting down here?

"We need a mix of both strategies, best player available at the position we need."

Um....that would be drafting for need. You did not just combine strategies. You chose need. Like we would actually draft worse players at our need positions during our picks. Gee guys, I think we should move down our table for this one...

It's an either/or question: Need or BPA. Ya'll are just starting to look like you're not paying attention when you say BPA at our position of need.

Theres a different b/w drafting for Need and then drafting BPA at position of need.

Drafting for need does this:

You rank the positions that you need to get better at, so for us it would be like:

1. DE

2. OG

3. CB

4. WR

or something like that. Drafting for need will make it so that you draft a DE in the first, OG in the second, CB in the third and WR in the fourth. THAT is drafting for need.

Drafting BPA for need does this:

You compile a list of what you need to get better at, but do not rank them. then you rank all the players in the draft.

When your pick comes up and the best player in the draft is an OG, and OG is a position of need, you draft the OG.

[Skinsfor4]

Draft a player that will make an impact fairly quickly.DE or Hardy at WR with the 21st pick would work for me.

[Burgundy Burner]

I would prefer that we draft according to need.

However, I hope we don't draft WR Sean Penix of Arkansas. With a name like that, we'd never hear the end of it.